# Sticky  Alpha Quadra - Hangout Thread



## Abraxas

The purpose of this thread is to engage in conversation with members of this quadra, to ask questions and (hopefully) receive answers from alphas, and otherwise develop a better understanding of this quadra group through direct interaction and/or observation. This thread is for general discussion about whatever is on your mind, but is particularly focused on discussion between those who belong to the alpha quadra.

Good information (in my opinion) on the alpha quadra can be found here: Alpha Quadra - Wikisocion

If you are not an alpha you are still welcome to post in this thread, but posts from those identifying themselves as belonging to the alpha quadra are highly encouraged so that others can benefit from examining the way in which alphas tend to express themselves. Feel free to use this thread to discuss the alpha quadra itself as well, and maybe an alpha or two will be interested in giving some first-hand feedback on their own perspectives.


----------



## liebling

Hey fellow Alphas!


----------



## bombsaway

liebling said:


> Hey fellow Alphas!


Are you ILE? If so, then we're duals.


----------



## liebling

bombsaway said:


> Are you ILE? If so, then we're duals.


Huzzah a dual! A genuine SEI on a personality forum! This has made my day  When did you find out your type? Did you do a 'Type Me' thread on here?


----------



## bombsaway

liebling said:


> Huzzah a dual! A genuine SEI on a personality forum! This has made my day  When did you find out your type? Did you do a 'Type Me' thread on here?


I did! But I think the main thing that brought me to this typing was talking to people in the rest of the forum. It was probably around Easter time when I made my thread and although some have suggested other types I think SEI fits best. I think I knew I was Alpha as soon as I read the Quadra descriptions though!

How about you?


----------



## liebling

bombsaway said:


> I did! But I think the main thing that brought me to this typing was talking to people in the rest of the forum. It was probably around Easter time when I made my thread and although some have suggested other types I think SEI fits best. I think I knew I was Alpha as soon as I read the Quadra descriptions though!How about you?


I had a good look at your thread. I'm still trying to to calm myself down and your thread isn't helping. The SEI signs are very clear and I've never seen them before on this forum.I'm also chuckling at what the others were suggesting. I'm not surprised though, I don't think many people would have known how to deal with the elusive SEI when she finally showed up.Ah, well like a good, little ILE I became too fascinated with the theory to wait for someone else to type me. I devoured the theory on Wikisocion and other sources and from that came to an understanding of what type I was


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Now I can


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare

I'm SEI. A really lazy, indecisive one. 

Sometimes I get EII and even IEI. But almost every time I take the Sociotype.com extended, I get SEI. It's become a crazy habit. Can someone please stalk me and make sure I'm SEI?


----------



## Kanerou

ParetoCaretheStare said:


> I'm SEI. A really lazy, indecisive one.
> 
> Sometimes I get EII and even IEI. But almost every time I take the Sociotype.com extended, I get SEI. It's become a crazy habit. Can someone please stalk me and make sure I'm SEI?


Most tests suck. Learning about the IM elements, Model A, and quadras should help.


----------



## Abraxas

I would just go with the basic four dichotomies.


----------



## bombsaway

ParetoCaretheStare said:


> I'm SEI. A really lazy, indecisive one.
> 
> Sometimes I get EII and even IEI. But almost every time I take the Sociotype.com extended, I get SEI. It's become a crazy habit. Can someone please stalk me and make sure I'm SEI?


You can try making a thread in the What's My Type? forum if you haven't already. Since you're INFP MBTI, one theory is that you should just switch J/P so you'd be INFj (IEI) here. Not everyone holds to that theory but it's a starting place. If you want to learn a lot about the theory then check out the sticky threads. It'd be nice to have another SEI around so if you are hopefully I'll see you round!


----------



## Abraxas

IMO, the best way to go about it is to just take the following test:

Type indicator

And then whatever MBTI type you get from that, just go straight over to the exact same Socionics type, don't flip the J/P either. Ignore the functions, they don't really matter. It's a level of detail that isn't necessary. It's like taking your car to the mechanic and explaining what's wrong by describing hydrocarbons and thermodynamics instead of just saying "I think the spark plugs are out." The dichotomies are all you need. They are the macro-scale, functions are the micro-scale and aren't that important. When you build a house, you don't need to know the particle physics that describes the molecular structure of the wood. You just bang on nails and get it done.


----------



## Mizmar

Abraxas said:


> IMO, the best way to go about it is to just take the following test:
> 
> Type indicator


I got INFP, but I was very close to the Thinking/Feeling border. If I type myself as an INXP, will I be accepted into both the Alpha quadra and Delta quadra?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Mizmar said:


> I got INFP, but I was very close to the Thinking/Feeling border. If I type myself as an INXP, will I be accepted into both the Alpha quadra and Delta quadra?


INFp and INTp would be Beta and Gamma... (he said "don't even flip the P/J")


----------



## liminalthought

Abraxas said:


> IMO, the best way to go about it is to just take the following test:
> 
> Type indicator
> 
> And then whatever MBTI type you get from that, just go straight over to the exact same Socionics type, don't flip the J/P either. Ignore the functions, they don't really matter. It's a level of detail that isn't necessary. It's like taking your car to the mechanic and explaining what's wrong by describing hydrocarbons and thermodynamics instead of just saying "I think the spark plugs are out." The dichotomies are all you need. They are the macro-scale, functions are the micro-scale and aren't that important. When you build a house, you don't need to know the particle physics that describes the molecular structure of the wood. You just bang on nails and get it done.



NO.


----------



## Abraxas

liminalthought said:


> NO.


Nah man. Yes.


----------



## liminalthought

Abraxas said:


> Nah man. Yes.


You're breeding evil...never mind, whatever, have at them. 


Be warned, someone will bite back.


----------



## Abraxas

liminalthought said:


> You're breeding evil...never mind, whatever, have at them.
> 
> 
> Be warned, someone will bite back.


I can't take anyone seriously who takes cognitive functions seriously, I'm sorry. Whenever I read a post by someone that starts out "Well you're Fi is in X relationship with Ne, and that means..."

I pretty much just stop reading.

Dichotomies on the other hand, are well-established in psychology. The MBTI/Socionics four core dichotomies more or less draw from four of the Big 5, which have decades of statistical evidence to support them.

Pretty much nobody takes cognitive functions seriously except Jung enthusiasts.

The irony is that not even Jung took his own cognitive functions very seriously.


----------



## Kanerou

Abraxas said:


> I can't take anyone seriously who takes cognitive functions seriously, I'm sorry.


I don't take you seriously if you disregard them (CFs or IM elements). I very much doubt I'll be the only one.


----------



## Bluity

Abraxas said:


> IMO, the best way to go about it is to just take the following test:
> 
> Type indicator


This was a very hard test to complete. Almost all of them I would have answered with an "It depends" or "both." 

I got INTJ. But I'm an INTP. J score was moderate.


----------



## liminalthought

Abraxas said:


> I can't take anyone seriously who takes cognitive functions seriously, I'm sorry. Whenever I read a post by someone that starts out "Well you're Fi is in X relationship with Ne, and that means..."
> 
> I pretty much just stop reading.
> 
> Dichotomies on the other hand, are well-established in psychology. The MBTI/Socionics four core dichotomies more or less draw from four of the Big 5, which have decades of statistical evidence to support them.
> 
> Pretty much nobody takes cognitive functions seriously except Jung enthusiasts.
> 
> The irony is that not even Jung took his own cognitive functions very seriously.


 I know I know. I'm not into fitting puzzle pieces together either. I hate it when people think it's like mixing things into a blender to come up with their own meaning and never actually say anything.


----------



## Abraxas

Bluity said:


> This was a very hard test to complete. Almost all of them I would have answered with an "It depends" or "both."
> 
> I got INTJ. But I'm an INTP. J score was moderate.


It's a copy of the standard Form M that you'd receive from a certified MBTI specialist.


----------



## Abraxas

Kanerou said:


> I don't take you seriously if you disregard them (CFs or IM elements). I very much doubt I'll be the only one.


I'm really not worried about it.

The thing is, I have statistical facts and evidence to provide me with self-esteem and confidence that I'm right.


----------



## Kanerou

Abraxas said:


> The thing is, I have statistical facts and evidence to provide me with self-esteem and confidence that I'm right.


You have statistical facts and evidence that people's socionics type can be consistently identified in an accurate manner by using only the dichotomies and ignoring the IM elements.


----------



## liminalthought

Oh no, the gamma thread's history is being repeated.


----------



## Abraxas

Kanerou said:


> You have statistical facts and evidence that people's socionics type can be consistently identified in an accurate manner by using only the dichotomies and ignoring the IM elements.


Oh, no no. Nothing of the sort. Socionics is it's own thing.

But you start from what you do know, and you build on that. And since anyone who studies psychology seriously will tell you that the Big 5 dimensions are pretty solid, and that the four MBTI dimensions more or less draw from those, minus neuroticism, then you can figure out where you fall into the MBTI dichotomies and compare that to the Socionics "Jungian" dichotomies (which, to be fair, are slightly different and based more on Jung's conceptualization of the scales rather than the decades of research that led to the development of the modern MBTI scales, which differ from Jung's scales somewhat).

Doing that, I predict, would give you a better shot at a "best fit" - though, naturally I suspect there'd be some errors due to cross-interference of all kinds on both fronts.

Still, when in Rome.


----------



## Abraxas

liminalthought said:


> Oh no, the gamma thread's history is being repeated.


Yeah, I'm gonna duck out here actually. I don't want to start a war with these guys. :\


----------



## Kanerou

Abraxas said:


> Oh, no no. Nothing of the sort. Socionics is it's own thing.
> 
> But you start from what you do know, and you build on that. And since anyone who studies psychology seriously will tell you that the Big 5 dimensions are pretty solid, and that the four MBTI dimensions more or less draw from those, minus neuroticism, then you can figure out where you fall into the MBTI dichotomies and compare that to the Socionics "Jungian" dichotomies (which, to be fair, are slightly different and based more on Jung's conceptualization of the scales rather than the decades of research that led to the development of the modern MBTI scales, which differ from Jung's scales somewhat).
> 
> Doing that, I predict, would give you a better shot at a "best fit" - though, naturally I suspect there'd be some errors due to cross-interference of all kinds on both fronts.
> 
> Still, when in Rome.


Until you can prove that your method actually works in Socionics, rather than giving me some sort of "well, I'm confident it works in this theory, so I predict it'll work in the other one even though I say it's its own thing and that the dichotomies are slightly different" contradictory nonsense, my opinion of your understanding (or complete lack thereof) stands.


----------



## Abraxas

Kanerou said:


> Until you can prove that your method actually works in Socionics, rather than giving me some sort of "well, I'm confident it works in this theory, so I predict it'll work in the other one even though I say it's its own thing and that the dichotomies are slightly different" contradictory nonsense, my opinion of your understanding (or complete lack thereof) stands.


Cool. Well, good luck with that. I'm out.


----------



## Bluity

Abraxas said:


> It's a copy of the standard Form M that you'd receive from a certified MBTI specialist.


I was first introduced to MBTI by taking the test at the behest of a career counselor. It was many years ago though, and I don't remember the actual test, but I did score INTP.

Questions like those are meaningless without context. They should at least give you the option of skipping questions you are do not strongly relate to. I'd rather have tests that rate behaviors on a scale, like with a slider or a system of one to five.


----------



## Mizmar

Bluity said:


> This was a very hard test to complete. Almost all of them I would have answered with an "It depends" or "both."
> 
> I got INTJ. But I'm an INTP. J score was moderate.


That's the problem I have with those kinds of tests. There are no "both" or "neither" or "does not apply" categories, so for many of the questions I just choose randomly.


----------



## LibertyPrime

liminalthought said:


> Oh no, the gamma thread's history is being repeated.


o.o the what now?


----------



## liminalthought

FreeBeer said:


> o.o the what now?


:laughing:


----------



## LibertyPrime

liminalthought said:


> :laughing:


----------



## liminalthought

FreeBeer said:


>


Irony on so many levels.


----------



## LibertyPrime

liminalthought said:


> Irony on so many levels.


 @Abraxas has a point thou :mellow: lol (he is also funny). I mean functionally I'm ESI for example and even the dichotomies fit more or less, but no way in hell am I IJ. Despite being Fi base I'm very much a stereotypical perciever / irrational.



FreeBeer said:


> ^^ yeah definitely, I mean functions are spot on imo, dichotomies more or less, but I'm the opposite of slow & steady, stick to routine, inert and always finish what you start.
> 
> Just look at the MBTI IxFP descriptions. Those are accurate when it comes to this, even Keirsey is accurate when it comes to this. I'm pretty much a perciever, which to me means I prefer inductive reasoning, I keep considering newer and newer information at the cost of postponing decision making as long as I can, I'm random, chaotic, disorganized and don't make detailed plans. This doesn't mean that I'm messy (but I am sadly). I may start stuff but not finish, unless I really have to and I keep improving it long after the deadline is due .
> 
> I like tactical approaches, in the moment adaptation and problem solving, dealing with a crisis. Am not a good strategist and someone should build me a pet robot to do my repetitive chores.


----------



## Kanerou

FreeBeer said:


> @_Abraxas_ has a point thou :mellow: lol (he is also funny). I mean functionally I'm ESI for example and even the dichotomies fit more or less, but no way in hell am I IJ. Despite being Fi base I'm very much a stereotypical perciever / irrational.


A point where? Where he said the dichotomies (as in I/E, N/S, T/F, J/P or j/p) are better than the CFs (and, presumably, the IEs as well), or where he said that you can just import your type wholesale from MBTI? Because neither of those support what you're saying here. He never addressed Reinin that I saw.


----------



## LibertyPrime

Kanerou said:


> A point where? Where he said the dichotomies (as in I/E, N/S, T/F, J/P or j/p) are better than the CFs (and, presumably, the IEs as well), or where he said that you can just import your type wholesale from MBTI? Because neither of those support what you're saying here. He never addressed Reinin that I saw.


 the point was explained in my post that you quoted. Stop trying to pick a fight. Not going to repeat what I said earlier.


----------



## Kanerou

FreeBeer said:


> the point was explained in my post that you quoted. Stop trying to pick a fight. Not going to repeat what I said earlier.


So because I challenge the consistency of what you're saying, I'm trying to pick a fight? Nice.

*rereads* I see what you're attempting to argue there. Still doesn't work. If you were to use his method, you'd be stuck in SEI land, squirming because it doesn't fit. It is because you go deeper than the Jungian dichotomies that you have a type that fits better.


----------



## LibertyPrime

Kanerou said:


> So because I challenge the consistency of what you're saying, I'm trying to pick a fight? Nice.
> 
> *rereads* I see what you're attempting to argue there. Still doesn't work. If you were to use his method, you'd be stuck in SEI land, squirming because it doesn't fit. It is because you go deeper than the Jungian dichotomies that you have a type that fits better.


ESI doesn't fit either, as I said I'm not IJ. Its either the dichotomies don't fit properly or the functions don't. When theory doesn't fit reality, there is something very wrong with theory.

Surprisingly the MBTI fits functions and dichotomies as well. In my opinion there is something wrong with socionics. Despite being functionally ESI, I have yet to experience this duality they speak of with ENTJs. From experience attempting to interact with them here on the forums I'd say they step on almost every value I have and I constantly feel like I need to defend and rebel, deny, defy. The idea that ENTJs are my dual...is depressing.

Something is not right here.


----------



## Kanerou

FreeBeer said:


> ESI doesn't fit either, as I said I'm not IJ. Its either the dichotomies don't fit properly or the functions don't. When theory doesn't fit reality, there is something very wrong with theory.


I said "fits better", not "fits completely". I'm aware that you have problems with ESI as well.



> Surprisingly the MBTI fits functions and dichotomies as well. In my opinion there is something wrong with socionics. Despite being functionally ESI, I have yet to experience this duality they speak of with ENTJs. From experience attempting to interact with them here on the forums I'd say they step on almost every value I have and I constantly feel like I need to defend and rebel, deny, defy. The idea that ENTJs are my dual...is depressing.
> 
> Something is not right here.


ENTJ isn't your dual; LIE is (or would be). Have you tried interacting with LIEs and seeing how that goes?


----------



## bombsaway

FreeBeer said:


> ESI doesn't fit either, as I said I'm not IJ. Its either the dichotomies don't fit properly or the functions don't. When theory doesn't fit reality, there is something very wrong with theory.
> 
> Surprisingly the MBTI fits functions and dichotomies as well. In my opinion there is something wrong with socionics.


I actually have the opposite problem. Socionics fits IE wise and dichotomy wise whereas MBTI only fits with CFs. Like you, I'm definitely no judger despite using Fe. 

Mine _could _​admittedly be solved with @Abraxas' dichotomy theory if I ignored functions and were ISFP/p in both.


----------



## liminalthought

LIE is ENTJ 
you will obey


----------



## LibertyPrime

Kanerou said:


> I said "fits better", not "fits completely". I'm aware that you have problems with ESI as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ENTJ isn't your dual; LIE is (or would be). Have you tried interacting with LIEs and seeing how that goes?


I haven't tried yet.



bombsaway said:


> I actually have the opposite problem. Socionics fits IE wise and dichotomy wise whereas MBTI only fits with CFs. Like you, I'm definitely no judger despite using Fe.
> 
> Mine _could _​admittedly be solved with @Abraxas' dichotomy theory if I ignored functions and were ISFP/p in both.


Well, I won't deny that I like comfort. I like art and color and aesthetics yes, have never attempted any of it, because of social pressure. I also don't like conflict, would prefer to avoid it if possible. Sadly reality is this: it isn't possible . Plus I'm definitely intensity triad and being reactive is something i have to work with (part of having a point 6 fixation - authority issues -)



liminalthought said:


> LIE is ENTJ
> you will obey


Never.


----------



## bombsaway

All you gammas are bring your negative energy and violent pictures into our thread.










Don't you know you're in alpha territory?


----------



## Abraxas

Okay, I know I said I'd drop it, but I hate watching people struggle.

It may help some of you to look into the NEO-PI-R test, I'm sure there's a few free online ones floating around.

The reason I suggest this is because, first of all, the NEO-PI-R is what you will be taught when you go to college and get a degree in depth psychology, specializing in personality theory. You may be taught the basics of MBTI, but only as a precursor to the Big 5, because the Big 5 is what is the most widely accepted model of personality type all over the world. Both MBTI and Socionics (being entirely "Jung-centric") completely leave out an empirically well established personality trait in the Big 5 (that Jung never thought of) called "neuroticism." It is entirely possible that some of you might score a little above average in neuroticism and that would account for the minor discrepancies between yourself and the flat four-dichotomies type descriptions you're reading in both MBTI and Socionics.

Just throwing it out there, because at least in my case, it almost completely corrects for the discrepancies between my actual personality and that of an ILI without even having to go into functions at all. Literally I can just break it down to introvert-irrational-thinker-intuitive and by adding on "slightly neurotic" - there's no more question in my mind that I've found my type.

The reason for this is actually very simple and very intuitive and what (at least in my mind) backs up why I'm recommending a dichotomy approach to type. The Big 5 lists the 5 dimensions of personality type as (in no particular order) neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and extraversion. These more or less correspond to four of the MBTI/Socionics dichotomies that determine your type. Openness = intuitiveness, agreeableness = feeling, extraversion = extraversion, conscientiousness = rationality/judgment, and neuroticism doesn't have a correlate in either.

In other words, a low score in conscientiousness is more or less the same thing as scoring high in irrationality/perception. A low score in extraversion is more or less the same thing as being introverted. A low score in openness is more or less being more of a sensation/concrete type. A low score in agreeableness more or less means you are a tough-minded thinker. One thing I actually like more about the Big 5 is that these dimensions don't perfectly cross over. You can be a thinker that scores rather high in openness because your thinking is more of an exploratory-theoretical kind, and also score high in agreeableness because that doesn't need to imply that you're not a nice person. It's always been one of my core points of contention with both MBTI and Socionics. These models would have you believe that just because you are a logical, hard-headed, point-of-fact kinda guy, you can't be a mushy, feely kinda guy as well who cries at the movies during the sappy parts and genuinely feels compassion for everyone and tries to promote harmony.

Anyway, TL;DR, ya'll ought to check out the NEO-PI-R if you're having this much difficulty with your type and then come back to Socionics and MBTI with some new ideas rolling around in your head that might make it clear that the issue isn't with you, or that you lack self-knowledge and self-understanding, it's with these backwards models that don't account for all the factors in a way that actually lines up with the way things really are.


----------



## Kanerou

bombsaway said:


> All you gammas are bring your negative energy and violent pictures into our thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you know you're in alpha territory?


Heh. That did occur to me. I don't mind taking this elsewhere if we're killing your happy thread too much.

@_Abraxas_ Your most recent post makes me wonder how much you've really studied socionics. Do you understand the Model A at all? Do you understand the concept of duality and the mechanisms behind it? Do you understand what extroversion and introversion mean in socionic terms? I would guess "no", given the complaints you've voiced here. Socionics in the West has some very good material (as does Main Page - WSWiki), and it might explain some of your concerns with the theory.


----------



## Kanerou

@Abraxas Concerning the cognitive functions (MBTI), you seem to expound upon them quite a bit for someone who can't take seriously others who use them; and while I'm no expert, you seem to be fairly good at explaining them. This comes off as highly inconsistent to me.


----------



## Abraxas

Kanerou said:


> @_Abraxas_ Concerning the cognitive functions (MBTI), you seem to expound upon them quite a bit for someone who can't take seriously others who use them; and while I'm no expert, you seem to be fairly good at explaining them. This comes off as highly inconsistent to me.


Maybe that's the problem. The inconsistency isn't with me or my behavior, it's your way of looking at things.

You're choosing to believe, and not recognizing, that I'm the kind of person who deeply studies something before I levy an opinion about it.

The fact is, I _do_ understand the concepts that make up the Jungian functions, and that's precisely why I can play around with them and show how they mean X or mean Y to give other people a better understanding of them if they so choose to believe in them.

This entire time, I've been giving my _honest personal opinion_ about what _I prefer and believe would help people._ I'm not trying to denounce Socionics, and certainly not MBTI. In fact, I find MBTI laudable, and insofar as Socionics shares a lot in common with it, Socionics as well.

But I'm not going to tell people lies. I'm going to repeat what I was taught in college when I attended. I'm going to tell people what I read in peer-reviewed journals full of accumulated articles citing important studies done for over 50 years.

The simple fact is that I just _don't have citations like that to draw upon to back up Socionics._

Does that mean I think Socionics is false? No, of course not. It could be perfectly true. But can I, in good conscious argue that it IS true without myself being convinced of that based on strong evidence and decades of resource by literally hundreds of scientists? No. I'm going to point people in the direction of established theories first, and _then_ recommend, if they want to learn more, they might have a gander at the "fringe" theories.

It's like saying, I'm not going to introduce my students to modal realism and the "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics without first laying out some of the basics of the Copenhagen interpretation and the core principals of physics themselves. To start people out with the wildly speculative stuff and pretend we all ought to bow down to it is just nonsensical.

Now, if you happen to have 50 years of dedicated research by _multiple_ peer-reviewed journalists reporting on and citing widely accepted empirical studies, then by all means, throw down. I _do_ (despite all surface appearances) really like Socionics and want to see it succeed as a theory. But has it? Arguably not, by comparison to others I've been espousing. I would really like to read some serious material backing it up.

I mean, you're a reasonable person, right? Help me out here. Chalk up some links to legitimate articles so I can read them and go, "huh, this guy has a point. Those studies look really legitimate and lend a lot of validity to the theory, maybe I ought to recommend this theory before I recommend this other theory which is currently the academic standard taught in the public institutions I attended, such as UC Berkeley for instance."


----------



## LibertyPrime

bombsaway said:


> All you gammas are bring your negative energy and violent pictures into our thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you know you're in alpha territory?


o.o I think we are confusing type 9 tendencies for quadra values here...or are we? The Dude is a 9. I wonder if all 9s are alpha and delta....


----------



## liminalthought

bombsaway said:


> All you gammas are bring your negative energy and violent pictures into our thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you know you're in alpha territory?


Very good point. I...shall...obey


----------



## Kanerou

Abraxas said:


> Maybe that's the problem. The inconsistency isn't with me or my behavior, it's your way of looking at things.
> 
> You're choosing to believe, and not recognizing, that I'm the kind of person who deeply studies something before I levy an opinion about it.


I am making an observation based on what I see in front of me. I didn’t call you names or maliciously insult you. I simply mentioned that what you say doesn’t seem to match what you do. All you had to do was offer an explanation for the contradiction. Instead, you choose to actively blame me for any and all misperception and accuse me of “choosing to believe” something mistaken instead of noticing that you operate differently. Because you know, we have a long and deep history, and I know all these things about you, and any misunderstanding is willful and conscious on my part. (9_9 )

As I said previously, your complaints about Socionics indicate to me that you have not studied it very deeply; or, if you have, that you didn’t truly understand what you studied.



> The fact is, I _do_ understand the concepts that make up the Jungian functions, and that's precisely why I can play around with them and show how they mean X or mean Y to give other people a better understanding of them if they so choose to believe in them.


That doesn’t make sense to me. If you believe they over-complicate things and are inferior to the dichotomies, why would you bother with them at all now, even to indulge those who you consider to cling to them no matter what? (Which actually seems a bit condescending.)



> This entire time, I've been giving my _honest personal opinion_ about what _I prefer and believe would help people._ I'm not trying to denounce Socionics, and certainly not MBTI. In fact, I find MBTI laudable, and insofar as Socionics shares a lot in common with it, Socionics as well.


I have never said that you were trying to denounce either. Nor have I said that you think either is false (per your statement farther down). I said you didn't appear to understand socionics. Then I offered you helpful materials. Socionics and MBTI share roots in Jung, but their creators took them in different directions. That doesn't make either less useful; I think they're both useful in their own ways.



> But I'm not going to tell people lies. I'm going to repeat what I was taught in college when I attended. I'm going to tell people what I read in peer-reviewed journals full of accumulated articles citing important studies done for over 50 years.
> 
> The simple fact is that I just _don't have citations like that to draw upon to back up Socionics._



Yes, we established that.



> Does that mean I think Socionics is false? No, of course not. It could be perfectly true. But can I, in good conscious argue that it IS true without myself being convinced of that based on strong evidence and decades of resource by literally hundreds of scientists? No. I'm going to point people in the direction of established theories first, and _then_ recommend, if they want to learn more, they might have a gander at the "fringe" theories.
> 
> It's like saying, I'm not going to introduce my students to modal realism and the "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics without first laying out some of the basics of the Copenhagen interpretation and the core principals of physics themselves. To start people out with the wildly speculative stuff and pretend we all ought to bow down to it is just nonsensical.
> 
> Now, if you happen to have 50 years of dedicated research by _multiple_ peer-reviewed journalists reporting on and citing widely accepted empirical studies, then by all means, throw down. I _do_ (despite all surface appearances) really like Socionics and want to see it succeed as a theory. But has it? Arguably not, by comparison to others I've been espousing. I would really like to read some serious material backing it up.


As far as I know, there isn’t currently a ton of empirical research to back up Socionics’ claims. If that's what you need in order to find a theory useful, I question what you are doing on a pop psychology board. The fact remains, however, that the Socionics dichotomies are not necessarily equivalent to the Big 5 or MBTI’s dichotomies, and that the IM elements are an integral part of the theory. If you want to study Socionics, go ahead. It’s pretty cool. But don’t make the mistake of assuming it’s equal to either of the two theories and that you can just neatly convert between them. That’s not how it works.

If you are interested in Socionics articles, Socionics - the16types.info - Home is gathering a database of writings, some from wikis and some from established socionists in Eastern Europe. You may find helpful info there.



> I mean, you're a reasonable person, right? Help me out here.


You know, you can just ask me without attempting to appeal to my “good qualities” to make me want to help you, or whatever you are trying here. It feels manipulative, and I don’t care for it.



> Chalk up some links to legitimate articles so I can read them and go, "huh, this guy has a point. Those studies look really legitimate and lend a lot of validity to the theory, maybe I ought to recommend this theory before I recommend this other theory which is currently the academic standard taught in the public institutions I attended, such as UC Berkeley for instance."


See above.


----------



## Kanerou

@Promethea Do the mods have any ability to do a thread split if the Alphas here prefer it?


----------



## bombsaway

FreeBeer said:


> o.o I think we are confusing type 9 tendencies for quadra values here...or are we? The Dude is a 9. I wonder if all 9s are alpha and delta....


I'd imagine Dude to be a SEI, no? He seems to fit the lazy hedonist description very well. Definitely IP. Definitely concerned with comfort primarily. He also seems driven to be a good person but not in a gamma Fi sort of way. I read on 16types somewhere that Alphas tend to want to minimise negative emotions and sensations rather that create positive ones. To me, that seems very Dude-ish. Primarily I was trying to think of a laid back movie character to boost the stereotype. 

I wouldn't think all Alpha would be 9. ENTPs seem to unanimously type as 7s (except of course for Sonny, who is a 9) and I think I know one ESE 9. To be honest, I think it's just primarily the SEIs.


----------



## Kanerou

bombsaway said:


> I read on 16types somewhere that Alphas tend to want to minimise negative emotions and sensations rather that create positive ones.


+/- theory, maybe? Anyway, that doesn't make sense to me. Minimizing negative emotions can be part of promoting positive emotions, particularly in a sort of exclusive way ("I only want the happy stuff, so I'm going to ignore the sad/angry stuff"). If you want to minimize the negative but aren't particularly into promoting the positive, you're just left with dead atmosphere. Where's the fun in that?


----------



## bombsaway

Kanerou said:


> +/- theory, maybe? Anyway, that doesn't make sense to me. Minimizing negative emotions can be part of promoting positive emotions, particularly in a sort of exclusive way ("I only want the happy stuff, so I'm going to ignore the sad/angry stuff"). If you want to minimize the negative but aren't particularly into promoting the positive, you're just left with dead atmosphere. Where's the fun in that?


Yes, that's it. I interpreted it as someone with -Fe being comfortable in a room with a friendly atmosphere and getting uncomfortable if it got out of hand. I think of it being accepting and warm and wanting to create at place where people can be at ease whilst talking. So, not necessarily a dead atmosphere just a relaxed one with the avoidance of risky or negative topics. For example, The Dude or Tyrion Lannister. In the Beta quadra and +Fe is more about self expression and drama. Creating at atmosphere where everyone is expressive. Quite forceful of being upbeat and getting everyone emotionally involved in the group.


----------



## Kanerou

@_Abraxas_ While you're at it, would you please explain to me how this:



Abraxas said:


> But I'm not going to tell people lies. I'm going to repeat what I was taught in college when I attended. *I'm going to tell people what I read in peer-reviewed journals full of accumulated articles citing important studies done for over 50 years.*
> 
> The simple fact is that I just _don't have citations like that to draw upon to back up Socionics._
> 
> Does that mean I think Socionics is false? No, of course not. It could be perfectly true. *But can I, in good conscious argue that it IS true without myself being convinced of that based on strong evidence and decades of resource by literally hundreds of scientists?* No. I'm going to point people in the direction of established theories first, and _then_ recommend, if they want to learn more, they might have a gander at the "fringe" theories.
> 
> It's like saying, I'm not going to introduce my students to modal realism and the "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics without first laying out some of the basics of the Copenhagen interpretation and the core principals of physics themselves. To start people out with the wildly speculative stuff and pretend we all ought to bow down to it is just nonsensical.
> 
> *Now, if you happen to have 50 years of dedicated research by multiple peer-reviewed journalists reporting on and citing widely accepted empirical studies, then by all means, throw down.* I _do_ (despite all surface appearances) really like Socionics and want to see it succeed as a theory. But has it? Arguably not, by comparison to others I've been espousing. *I would really like to read some serious material backing it up.*
> 
> I mean, you're a reasonable person, right? Help me out here. *Chalk up some links to legitimate articles so I can read them and go, "huh, this guy has a point. Those studies look really legitimate and lend a lot of validity to the theory, maybe I ought to recommend this theory before I recommend this other theory which is currently the academic standard taught in the public institutions I attended, such as UC Berkeley for instance."*


in no way contradicts your arguments in this thread? You don't seem particularly concerned there about whether there's any proof for cognitive functions, or whether Jung's theory is seen as scientific, yet you ask me for empirical evidence and established studies to prove that Socionics is worthwhile. In fact:



Abraxas said:


> Well honestly, I just don't worry about it much. Nobody said I needed to look out for everyone. *If you're worried about whether or not a theory is scientific that's fine, but my main response really was just to point out that not everyone necessarily has the same values you do and can get by just fine in life operating on a less accurate knowledge base. Like, for example, me.*
> 
> [...]
> 
> *Maybe I'm projecting my own apathy a bit, and I probably am, but whenever I see threads like this, my knee-jerk reaction is to wonder why people even take the whole thing (functions, MBTI, etc) so damn seriously in the first place. If you just think of it as a time waster that people enjoy taking seriously and that that's really just the beginning and end of it, then I think that's the right attitude. I don't know why a thing has to be "proven" for it to be important and worth people's time.* I mean, you don't "prove" that you really need to shoot everyone in a session of Call of Duty. Yet, people devote themselves to professional careers that consist of just playing that game. And for someone to come along and tell those people that they are just wasting their lives is, I think, the height of irony and stupidity, because it's a dumb waste of time to be telling them that in the first place if they already take it so seriously.
> 
> *But to answer your questions again, it has practical value because people put it to practice and value it. *It's that simple. Good and bad are not, and never will be, objective opinions about anything. Again, this boils down to your subjective values, and those who share them, and a kind of projection where your doctrine is essentially, "everyone ought to be like me," "stop liking the things that I don't like," "start liking the things I say are good, and start believing all these reasons I give for why they are good, because I think I am right and I want you to think I am right."


Yeah. And please, no more whiny crap about how it's all in my head, how you're in no way responsible, and how I'm choosing to believe the worst of you rather than somehow just understanding how your mind works.


----------



## Abraxas

Kanerou said:


> I am making an observation based on what I see in front of me. I didn’t call you names or maliciously insult you. I simply mentioned that what you say doesn’t seem to match what you do. All you had to do was offer an explanation for the contradiction. Instead, you choose to actively blame me for any and all misperception and accuse me of “choosing to believe” something mistaken instead of noticing that you operate differently. Because you know, we have a long and deep history, and I know all these things about you, and any misunderstanding is willful and conscious on my part. (9_9 )


Interesting that you ignored that I said "maybe" from the start, thus implying that I'm not actually accusing you of anything, only suggesting the mere _possibility_ of something. Yet, instead of paying attention to that, you (incorrectly) assume you are being "actively blamed."

The irony of course being that your very first statement is "I'm making an observation based on what I see in front of me."

Apparently not. Or then again, maybe that's true. Maybe that _is_ all you see, and I was absolutely right when I said, "Maybe that's the problem. The inconsistency isn't with me or my behavior, it's your way of looking at things."




Kanerou said:


> That doesn’t make sense to me. If you believe they over-complicate things and are inferior to the dichotomies, why would you bother with them at all now, even to indulge those who you consider to cling to them no matter what? (Which actually seems a bit condescending.)


Does it?

You know, I go to church sometimes without being Christian because I find it interesting and I want to be part of that culture? I suppose that's condescending to them, that I just want to learn about what they are doing and understand it? I suppose it's condescending that I study a lot of occult and mystical systems and have a rather well-educated understand of the core principals of things like hermetic alchemy, thelema, and Peter J Carroll's "chaos magick theory" without having to hold a personal conviction that any of it is true? The thing is, I can be personally detached from the things that I study, and I can correct other people or share with them the knowledge I've gained without having finalized a decision or made up my mind about whether a thing is actually true or not.



Kanerou said:


> I have never said that you were trying to denounce either. Nor have I said that you think either is false (per your statement farther down). I said you didn't appear to understand socionics. Then I offered you helpful materials. Socionics and MBTI share roots in Jung, but their creators took them in different directions. That doesn't make either less useful; I think they're both useful in their own ways.


I agree. I don't even understand why you felt the need to point this out, because I never said anything to bring it up.



Kanerou said:


> As far as I know, there isn’t currently a ton of empirical research to back up Socionics’ claims. If that's what you need in order to find a theory useful, I question what you are doing on a pop psychology board. The fact remains, however, that the Socionics dichotomies are not necessarily equivalent to the Big 5 or MBTI’s dichotomies, and that the IM elements are an integral part of the theory. If you want to study Socionics, go ahead. It’s pretty cool. But don’t make the mistake of assuming it’s equal to either of the two theories and that you can just neatly convert between them. That’s not how it works.


Again, you are building yourself a real nice straw man there. Never did I say that Socionics wasn't useful. I said I find other theories more useful _based on what I know about them._ What am I doing on a pop-psychology board? Discussing pop-psychology, isn't that obvious? What are _you_ doing here?

Nor did I ever state that the dimensions "equal" or "neatly convert." I said they "more or less" convert, which implies that they diverge. I didn't actually state how much I think they diverge, because honestly, the conversation hasn't even progressed that far yet. You're being so defensive about a theory that, frankly, I don't even have a problem with, that we're still at the starting gate.

Anyway, you've effectively once again ruined any interest I have in having this discussion with you because instead of addressing the subject matter, you're trying to paint a picture of my intentions and your intentions, and I really am not interested in sitting here and evaluating your character, or my character, or either of our value systems. I laid out why I have certain convictions in one system and not another - which convinces you that I don't have an understanding of Socionics. That makes really no sense at all, because the basis of my convictions is something perfectly reasonable.

Sorry, but once again I'm going to duck out here. I see nothing useful to continuing to discuss this with you.

_EDIT: As an exercise, why don't you try reconciling your own points of contention with what I have to say and seeing if you can come up with a positive solution to your question instead of trying to be the Spanish Inquisition demanding I prove I'm not a witch because you got a hair up your ass about what appears to you to be an apparent contradiction between one thing I have said and another._


----------



## Kanerou

Abraxas said:


> Sorry, but once again I'm going to duck out here. I see nothing useful to continuing to discuss this with you.


Well, then, we're even. I don't see you as a particularly reliable, consistent person whose words I can believe. Just as well we end it here.

_



EDIT: As an exercise, why don't you try reconciling your own points of contention with what I have to say and seeing if you can come up with a positive solution to your question instead of trying to be the Spanish Inquisition demanding I prove I'm not a witch because you got a hair up your ass about what appears to you to be an apparent contradiction between one thing I have said and another.

Click to expand...

_And you refuse to refute what I say. I consider my original opinion justified, then.


----------



## dodgem

Right, I've had just about enough of this silly bickering!1. @Abraxas, you're right that the dichotomies can be a good way to start with working out someone's type in Socionics. HOWEVER, in practice this can lead to huge mistypings because the test writers often don't understand the nuances of each of the dichotomies and are often unable to adequately convey them in the questions.For instance, on most mbti tests, Judging oriented questions are actually biased towards Logic as a judging IM Element and not Ethics, so FJ can be confused for FP. Also their ideas of Extroversion seems exclusively people-based, making IxFx types seem Extroverted and ExTx types seeming Introverted in some cases. Also, the Thinking/Feeling questions seem to focus too much on Feelers being nice people and Thinkers being insensitive while the Intuition/Sensation questions seem to focused on patterns and the 'big picture' which leads to inaccurate assessment.2. @FreeBeer - for the reasons I posted in 1, many people who are supposedly ENTJs in MBTI would not qualify as LIE in Socionics, in fact, the LIEs I know might be brash and insensitive at times, but they're often very much caught up on doing the 'right' thing (far more so than ILEs and EIEs) and an ESI's values should sync rather well.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

And here I thought a bunch of Alphas started posting in this thread. I am disappoint.


----------



## LibertyPrime

bombsaway said:


> I'd imagine Dude to be a SEI, no? He seems to fit the lazy hedonist description very well. Definitely IP. Definitely concerned with comfort primarily. He also seems driven to be a good person but not in a gamma Fi sort of way. I read on 16types somewhere that Alphas tend to want to minimise negative emotions and sensations rather that create positive ones. To me, that seems very Dude-ish. Primarily I was trying to think of a laid back movie character to boost the stereotype.
> 
> I wouldn't think all Alpha would be 9. ENTPs seem to unanimously type as 7s (except of course for Sonny, who is a 9) and I think I know one ESE 9. To be honest, I think it's just primarily the SEIs.


o.o yeah seems so, I agree he is SEI type 9.

My personality is more along the lines of an Arya Stark:












ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> And here I thought a bunch of Alphas started posting in this thread. I am disappoint.


^^ at least bombsaway is Alpha here lolol


----------



## Kanerou

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> And here I thought a bunch of Alphas started posting in this thread. I am disappoint.


Have a cookie for your disappointment. *offers tray*


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Kanerou said:


> Have a cookie for your disappointment. *offers tray*


They better fucking be chocolate chip ones that melt in your mouth... >.>


----------



## Kanerou

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> They better fucking be chocolate chip ones that melt in your mouth... >.>


*indicates the chocolate chip cookies toward the back of the tray*


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Kanerou said:


> *indicates the chocolate chip cookies toward the back of the tray*


Were you trying to poison me with that raisin crap? I'm onto you.


----------



## Kanerou

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Were you trying to poison me with that raisin crap? I'm onto you.


What's your problem? I only put the arsenic in the peanut butter cookies.


----------



## Helios

FreeBeer said:


> o.o I think we are confusing type 9 tendencies for quadra values here...or are we? The Dude is a 9. I wonder if all 9s are alpha and delta....


9w8 and gamma quadra. Fun stuff.


----------



## Kanerou

Ananael said:


> 9w8 and gamma quadra. Fun stuff.


What's your type?


----------



## Helios

Kanerou said:


> What's your type?


LIE-Ni, believe it or not.

Edit: I will admit that I come off as 3ish or 6ish at times. It's great.


----------



## Kanerou

Ananael said:


> LIE-Ni, believe it or not.
> 
> Edit: I will admit that I come off as 3ish or 6ish at times. It's great.


Yeah, I'm wondering how LIE 9 works. ( ) I admit to not knowing a ton about 9s, but the two seem pretty contradictory. How do you reconcile any discrepancies between the two?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

I really don't understand how ego types can be extroverted. :/


----------



## Helios

Kanerou said:


> Yeah, I'm wondering how LIE 9 works. ( ) I admit to not knowing a ton about 9s, but the two seem pretty contradictory. How do you reconcile any discrepancies between the two?


I think if anything it really compliments aspects of suggestive Fi and the Fe role function due to a lack of investment in people. And a lot of the contradictions seem to be rooted in that 9 seems to be Si-Fe to people who think 9s want to be buddy buddy with everyone and go out of their way to please. I've always cited that as more of an image triad or social instinct kind of thing.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I really don't understand how ego types can be extroverted. :/


Lol socially I'm more ambiverted. Cognitively I'm more outwardly focused and impersonal.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


> I think if anything it really compliments aspects of suggestive Fi and the Fe role function due to a lack of investment in people. And a lot of the contradictions seem to be rooted in that 9 seems to be Si-Fe to people who think 9s want to be buddy buddy with everyone and go out of their way to please. I've always cited that as more of an image triad or social instinct kind of thing.


Doesn't your base extroverted logic contradict your need for peace? Or maybe one is the goal and the other the means.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Doesn't your base extroverted logic contradict your need for peace? Or maybe one is the goal and the other the means.


Looking for things that are useful, acquiring information, and seeking some kind of increased effectiveness is peaceful in it's own right. And it's kind of my MO. And I think the means and the ends thing is quite on point.


----------



## LibertyPrime

Ananael said:


> LIE-Ni, believe it or not.
> 
> Edit: I will admit that I come off as 3ish or 6ish at times. It's great.


Well that sort of fits. 

Type 9 is positive outlook and so is LIE:



> *The Positive Outlook Group*
> The Positive Outlook Group is composed of types Nine, Two, and Seven. All three respond to conflict and difficulty by adopting, as much as possible, a “positive attitude,” reframing disappointment in some positive way. They want to emphasize the uplifting aspects of life and to look at the bright side of things. These types are morale-builders who enjoy helping other people feel good because they want to stay feeling good themselves (“I don’t have a problem”).


Type 9 however has a withdrawn social style, idk if this fits LIE:



> *The Withdrawn Style (Types 4,5,9)*
> 
> People whose dominant Social Style is the withdrawn style are quiet, introverted, and introspective. They enjoy spending lots of time by themselves and feel uncomfortable in large groups. They don't overtly seek attention and don't wish to assert themselves much. The feel uncomfortable taking charge or in competition. Instead, they feel excited by their own imagination. They have a sense of being different from others and not being part of their environment. Under stress, they withdraw from the world and into their inner space and imagination.
> 
> These people are not immediately comfortable working in groups and often prefer to work alone. They contemplate and refine their ideas by themselves. They will not present their ideas or assert themselves until they are very confident in their position.
> These people are out of touch with their instinctual drives. They have a hard time feeling their vitality and substance. To compensate for this imbalance, they identify more with their fantasies, thoughts, and dreams than with their own physical body.
> 
> These people move away from others (withdraw) to get their needs met.


9s are also part of the instinctual triad:



> *Nines deny their anger and instinctual energies* as if to say, "What anger? I am not a person who gets angry." Nines are the type most out of touch with their anger and instinctual energies, often feeling threatened by them. Of course, Nines get angry like everyone else, but try to stay out of their darker feelings by focusing on idealizations of their relationships and their world.


Type 9 has the following core motivation (this is what makes a 9 a 9):

*Nine -- The Mediator*
Everything will work out. Every point of view has value.

*Motivation:*
Toward: Keeping the peace, and merging with others.
*Away from:* Conflict.
*Focus of attention:* Other people’s position or point of view.


----------



## cyamitide

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I really don't understand how ego types can be extroverted. :/


why can't ego types be extroverted?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

cyamitide said:


> why can't ego types be extroverted?


I'm not answering a rhetorical question.


----------



## zinnia

I believe I am in alpha quadra. Hello. *waves*


----------



## zinnia

Kanerou said:


> You're welcome. I don't really know. Now that I think about it, I probably personify objects way more than my mother, who is Fe base. Whether that's a fluke, I couldn't say; I'm just one person, so I don't have a large enough pool of opinions/self-reports to draw any definite conclusions (other than "this isn't an absolute rule").


Right, that makes sense. It could just be a very slight tendency, if even that. I have had the opposite experience from yours. Two good friends of mine, one an ESI and the other EII (pretty sure for both), seem to sort of get the idea behind my personifications but they don't do that on their own.



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I love inside jokes, but I feel weird when I say it in front of a bunch of people who aren't in the inside. I don't get the point of they don't understand it. But, when used with your friends, it seems like they're always the funniest. There are some I still bring up to this day that are like 5-6 years old. xD


Haha. I definitely have my share of inside jokes with close friends, some of them also a few years old (and now I feel old!). We have a lot of fun with them but I do not like the alienating effect it tends to have if there are others around.


----------



## Bluity

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I've observed people who use self-deprecating humor are really insecure and use it as a way of indirectly getting feedback from people about whatever they're insecure about. Trollish humor is the best kind of humor if it's done in a non-douche-ish way.


Disagree on both accounts. There are people who are insecure, and there are people who are confident but enjoy jabbing themselves in obvious jest. I enjoy the latter.

I don't care for trollish humor.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Bluity said:


> Disagree on both accounts. There are people who are insecure, and there are people who are confident but enjoy jabbing themselves in obvious jest. I enjoy the latter.
> 
> I don't care for trollish humor.


I have yet to see someone confident self-deprecate themselves for humor. 

What do you mean by "trollish," exactly?


----------



## Bluity

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> What do you mean by "trollish," exactly?


Name-calling, using personal attacks, spewing obscenities. Purposely posting inflammatory messages to provoke responses.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Bluity said:


> Name-calling, using personal attacks, spewing obscenities. Purposely posting inflammatory messages to provoke responses.


Oh, I was thinking of it in a much more playful context.


----------



## Bluity

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Oh, I was thinking of it in a much more playful context.


You can have playful and sarcastic humor. But for me, trollish humor is that level of hateful speech that masquerades as humor. It includes fat-shaming, homophobic slurs, or any joke whose sole purpose is to tear others down.


----------



## Chesire Tower

INTP

*Preference clarity*

I
clear 

N
very clear 

T
moderate 

P
moderate


----------



## LibertyPrime

is this alpha behavior? XDDD


----------



## Kanerou

@zinnia Here we go. Taken from here. 

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

Ethics
Both extraverted and introverted ethics describe influencing and influences on people's feelings through vocabulary such as _offend, make happy, enthrall, infuriate, scare, get interested_. It appears that individuals with strong extraverted and introverted ethics emphasize somewhat different aspects of this influence: the former are focused on external action as a way of changing the emotional atmosphere (saying or doing something), whereas the latter are focused on changes in the subject's emotional state and feelings as a result of this impact.

The same is true of _emotional states_. Extraverted ethics emphasizes external manifestations (facial expressions, gestures, words), while introverted ethics emphasizes internal feelings, though the theme itself is a part of both aspects. *Also, all ethical types are prone to personification - the "animation" of unliving things ("bad computer!" "the computer is acting up again," "this fence doesn't seem to want to fall over; it's still alive").* The field of ethical aspects also includes evaluatory or emotionally charged oaths, for example "creep" or "mean person."

*Overlapping themes:*
Verbs describing relationships between people








describes external manifestations of relationships (meet, date, make friends, be friends, flirt, break up, make up, break off, suck up), while







describes the subject's experience of relationships (be grateful, admire, love, fall in love, hate, be offended, be embarrassed, value).

Verbs describing influencing feelings








focuses on the external (observable) actions associated with emotional interaction (excite, praise, get going, hurt, fool, offend, cheer up, scare, make laugh, comfort, calm down), while







focuses on internal feelings (trouble, get tired of, make nervious, offend, let down, scare, irritate, make mad, make upsent, calm). Note that the same words can be used, but with a different emphasis.

Abstract nouns for expressing emotions








focuses on visible emotional states (edginess, gloominess, breakdown, boredom, quietness, ecstasy, horror, panic, enthusiasm, sarcasm), while







focuses on internal feelings (guilt, unrest, delight, pride, annoyance, fright, love, hate, hurt, feeling, shame, embarrassment).

Adverbs describing how actions are performed and one's attitude toward them








, again, focuses on visible emotional attitudes (gladly, dismally, wonderfully, half-heartedly, discreetly, sarcastically), while







focuses on internal attitudes (frankly, honestly, dishonestly, decently, in a friendly way, in a good way, in a bad way, tactfully, tactlessly).


----------



## zinnia

@_Kanerou_ *"Also, all ethical types are prone to personification - the "animation" of unliving things ("bad computer!" "the computer is acting up again," "this fence doesn't seem to want to fall over; it's still alive")."*

Interesting. Thanks for the information. I've never seen that site before... something new to read, cool.



> *Overlapping themes:*
> Verbs describing relationships between people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> describes external manifestations of relationships (meet, date, make friends, be friends, flirt, break up, make up, break off, suck up), while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> describes the subject's experience of relationships (be grateful, admire, love, fall in love, hate, be offended, be embarrassed, value).
> 
> Verbs describing influencing feelings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> focuses on the external (observable) actions associated with emotional interaction (excite, praise, get going, hurt, fool, offend, cheer up, scare, make laugh, comfort, calm down), while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> focuses on internal feelings (trouble, get tired of, make nervious, offend, let down, scare, irritate, make mad, make upsent, calm). Note that the same words can be used, but with a different emphasis.
> 
> Abstract nouns for expressing emotions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> focuses on visible emotional states (edginess, gloominess, breakdown, boredom, quietness, ecstasy, horror, panic, enthusiasm, sarcasm), while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> focuses on internal feelings (guilt, unrest, delight, pride, annoyance, fright, love, hate, hurt, feeling, shame, embarrassment).
> 
> Adverbs describing how actions are performed and one's attitude toward them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , again, focuses on visible emotional attitudes (gladly, dismally, wonderfully, half-heartedly, discreetly, sarcastically), while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> focuses on internal attitudes (frankly, honestly, dishonestly, decently, in a friendly way, in a good way, in a bad way, tactfully, tactlessly).


I believe I can easily differentiate between extroverted and introverted ethics in others by the way they typically react to events and other people, but descriptions like this aren't perfectly clear to me... It is as if I don't really have a good understanding of the definition and so I really doubt if I was correct in the first place. I am sorry if you've been through this before but do you have any insights or thoughts that helped you tell the difference? When you decided you were Fi-base, was there any particular piece of information that led you to that conclusion? Thanks in advance.

@_FreeBeer_ (quotes keep giving me errors, sorry) I guess it could be...? When I watched it, it seemed a little forced/rehearsed to me so I didn't really find most of it to be very funny. I do occasionally pretend my plush dolls are real animals, I suppose. LOL.


----------



## LibertyPrime

zinnia said:


> @_FreeBeer_ (quotes keep giving me errors, sorry) I guess it could be...? When I watched it, it seemed a little forced/rehearsed to me so I didn't really find most of it to be very funny. I do occasionally pretend my plush dolls are real animals, I suppose. LOL.


o.o uhm, what quotes? Well..maybe its because they are gamers and since I'm a gamer and have played Bioshock before..I get what they are talking about. Maybe its just a nerd/geek thing  idk...sry.


----------



## Kanerou

*Many Paragraphs*



zinnia said:


> I believe I can easily differentiate between extroverted and introverted ethics in others by the way they typically react to events and other people, but descriptions like this aren't perfectly clear to me... It is as if I don't really have a good understanding of the definition and so I really doubt if I was correct in the first place.


I don't feel that rundown of the IEs is particularly clear, either. It does differentiate between the two, but it doesn't really get at the crux of what each is, IMO.



> I am sorry if you've been through this before but do you have any insights or thoughts that helped you tell the difference? When you decided you were Fi-base, was there any particular piece of information that led you to that conclusion? Thanks in advance.


I'll do a separate post on why I type as Fi-ego.

Both Fi and Fe focus on emotions (as opposed to MBTI Fi and Fe, which are more about where one's values originate). Fe (Extroverted/Emotive Ethics) focuses on expressed emotions and uses that expression to draw conclusions about the person's/groups current mood. Fe egos will try to shape those moods as they see fit. For example, when my little sister is angry, my ESE mother will be silly and seems to make light of my sister's irritation. To me, it seems dismissive, but apparently that is Mom's way of trying to cheer her up.

Fi (Introverted/Relational Ethics) focuses on sentiments, basically. The technical explanation is that Fi focuses on the stable (“static”) feelings between objects: like, love, hate, indifference, etc. Fi egos pay attention not only to their own sentiments but to others' as well; they can be quite concerned with not offending or hurting the other party and maneuver accordingly. They can also focus on relational distance – friends, how close of friends, acquaintances, enemies, mortal enemies, etc. What is OK coming from one person may not be OK coming from another, because one is a certain kind of friend and the other is an acquaintance or simply not as close as the other. For example, it always weirds me out to hear people I’m not close to shortening my name, as I see that as a sign of closeness/familiarity.

One significant difference between the two is that Fe tends to be less judgmental on a personal front. Fe types prefer to be in a group where people don't have to watch themselves for fear of hurting or offending others. There's a sort of expectation that people won't take things too seriously and get butthurt over what's being said. Fi types, on the other hand, are far more likely to care if they or another person are offended by what's happening at the moment.

A forumite called Expat had a great analogy on the difference between Fe and Fi. He described Fe as being like colored fog, swirling around between people and easily changing based on the current mood. He described Fi as being like lasers, stable connections that did not easily change color once set.


----------



## zinnia

FreeBeer said:


> o.o uhm, what quotes? Well..maybe its because they are gamers and since I'm a gamer and have played Bioshock before..I get what they are talking about. Maybe its just a nerd/geek thing  idk...sry.


Oh, sorry for explaining that badly! I was referring to quoting on this website. Whenever I tried quoting you it said "please type at least 1 character to post" so I gave up and just mentioned you instead. It works now though, as you can see.

Yeah, I've never played Bioshock so maybe that was it... when they started opening the box I was like "what are they going on about?" I used to play a lot more games years ago but I just never got around to playing Bioshock. =/ 

You play games a lot, then? Any good ones you've played recently?

@_Kanerou_, thanks, that was helpful. I think I was somewhat correct in my original understanding, at least regarding others' type... However, I relate to parts of each the way you presented them. Would an ethical type clearly prefer one or the other, or is there a lot of gray area, in your experience? (Also, how your mother reacted to your sister's anger is really annoying to me. I got bothered just reading it since I have had that happen to me so many times, I hate it... it felt like my emotions were trivialized.)


----------



## Bluity

zinnia said:


> (Also, how your mother reacted to your sister's anger is really annoying to me. I got bothered just reading it since I have had that happen to me so many times, I hate it... it felt like my emotions were trivialized.)


This is interesting. I want my emotions to be trivialized. If I let loose an outburst the last thing I want is for everything to grind to a halt and have the focus on me. It's embarrassing. I'd rather people pretend it didn't happen. It's a relief when someone cracks a joke and everyone goes about their way so I can sort out my problems in silence.


----------



## LibertyPrime

zinnia said:


> Oh, sorry for explaining that badly! I was referring to quoting on this website. Whenever I tried quoting you it said "please type at least 1 character to post" so I gave up and just mentioned you instead. It works now though, as you can see.
> 
> Yeah, I've never played Bioshock so maybe that was it... when they started opening the box I was like "what are they going on about?" I used to play a lot more games years ago but I just never got around to playing Bioshock. =/
> 
> You play games a lot, then? Any good ones you've played recently?


Recently no. I seem to have lost patience for games, nothing seems to hold my attention for long.


----------



## Kanerou

zinnia said:


> @_Kanerou_, thanks, that was helpful. I think I was somewhat correct in my original understanding, at least regarding others' type... However, I relate to parts of each the way you presented them. Would an ethical type clearly prefer one or the other, or is there a lot of gray area, in your experience?


It really depends on the type. An Ethical-base will have the other Ethical IE as their ignoring function. For ESE and EIE, this is Fi; for ESI and EII, this is Fe. Generally speaking, the information related to the ignoring function is dismissed in favor of what the always-on and most important base function is taking in; the former can just kind of "go hang" in the greater scheme of things. So ExE and ExI are going to be far less attentive to the other Ethical function. An Ethical-creative will have the other Ethical IE as their demonstrative function. The demonstrative function ultimately takes a backseat to the creative function, but it's not at utterly suppressed as the ignoring function and does have a relative importance to the type. xEE and xEI will be more attentive to the other Ethical function than an Ethical base, and they'll use it more, but it's still not as preferred as the creative function.

Which is to say: yes, you'll ultimately prefer one mode of perception over the other. The degree of preference and emphasis, however, depends on where they fall in your type model.



> (Also, how your mother reacted to your sister's anger is really annoying to me. I got bothered just reading it since I have had that happen to me so many times, I hate it... it felt like my emotions were trivialized.)


*nods* Yeah, that sucks to experience.


----------



## Jabberbroccoli

Dafuq is this quadra thing. Someone explain this.


----------



## Kanerou

Jabberbroccoli said:


> Dafuq is this quadra thing. Someone explain this.


Socionics looks at people's preference of certain modes of information and how those preferences can complement each other or clash completely, causing problems in interaction or relationships. Basically, each type prefers a certain 4 modes of information (IM elements) and dismisses/devalues the other. Quadras are formed by putting together the types that prefer the same 4 IM elements.

Alpha: Ne, Si, Fe, Ti (ILE, LII, ESE, SEI)
Beta: Ni, Se, Fe Ti (SLE, LSI, EIE, IEI)
Gamma: Ni, Se, Fi, Te (SEE, ESI, LIE, ILI)
Delta: Ne, Si, Fi, Te (IEE, EII, LSE, SLI)


----------



## zinnia

Bluity said:


> This is interesting. I want my emotions to be trivialized. If I let loose an outburst the last thing I want is for everything to grind to a halt and have the focus on me. It's embarrassing. I'd rather people pretend it didn't happen. It's a relief when someone cracks a joke and everyone goes about their way so I can sort out my problems in silence.


For me it depends on the situation and the intent. If I was in a group of people I would try not to have an actual outburst in the first place and if I did, I would also want it covered up so everyone continues with whatever they were doing... but if I am talking to my mother or a friend, I would expect they would actually try to talk to me about it and not just immediately move past it. I mean, even "You seem angry. Hey let's do something fun to get your mind off it!" would be okay.


----------



## Kanerou

*Sizeable Post on Fi*



zinnia said:


> I am sorry if you've been through this before but do you have any insights or thoughts that helped you tell the difference? When you decided you were Fi-base, was there any particular piece of information that led you to that conclusion? Thanks in advance.


Hmm. It's been a while since I made the Fe vs Fi decision. For a long time, I depended on others' reasoning to tell me my type. I still do that from time to time. However, I eventually realized that I'd never be able to solidly argue for my type if I didn't understand why I was that type; that meant understanding the IM elements behind my type.

I place a very strong emphasis on relational distance and on the bonds between myself and others. I can tell when I have formed a connection with someone or have chemistry with them (on my end). Even now, I recall a drawing I made back in high school. There was a circle in the middle, with either me or my “core” self, and then a bunch of circles around it like orbital patterns, in which I placed friends according to how close they were to me/my true self. That’s just naturally how I think.

Generally speaking, if I am fond of someone, I retain that fondness. I had a friend in high school who I loved (non-romantically) and with whom I was closer than any other friend before or since. We had to separate, not for lack of attachment, and it took me so many years to get over that. That’s a kind of bond that is extremely difficult to top or to replicate, and one that is sorely missed once it’s dissolved. I have other friends from high school who I don’t really talk to much anymore, but I still very much care for them because of what we once had. On the flipside, if I despise someone… my ability to hold a grudge is legendary, and people who find my shit list tend to stay there. If you’ve read Pride and Prejudice, there’s a part where Mr Darcy mentions that his good opinion, once lost, is gone forever. Mr Darcy is not ESI, but I very much identify with that line. In fact can very easily think of a young man from high school who pisses me off to this day, and I haven’t seen him since 10[SUP]th[/SUP] grade.

My value system is arguably somewhat flexible and greatly influenced by how I feel about the person I am dealing with. Or perhaps in that sense, it is not actually “flexible” but rather determined by different criteria than I expect a value system to adhere to. For example, I was raised Christian and have noticed that while I may espouse and defend certain Christian values, my own performance can come up woefully short. It’s not that I am maliciously being a hypocrite and knowingly holding myself to a different standard. In fact, I try to avoid it when I realize what I’m about to do. Rather, it’s shown me that what I consider to be “proper” and “right” because I was raised to believe that is not always congruous with what I really believe deep down. But… all that to say that it’s somewhat hard to accurately judge or describe my personal value system because I still measure it against what I’ve been taught is good and right when they’re really not working with the same criteria. I don’t consider Christian values inherently Fi or Fe, and any type can adhere to them for whatever reasons they have.

I really don’t recall when I settled on Fi for my type. I actually thought I was IEI for a while, due to some pretty blatant Se-valuing tendencies. However, I did eventually realize that Fe > Fi made no sense for me, that I was so very Fi it was ridiculous. Some of the reasons for that decision are listed above. Others, like my understanding of my personal values (which is not inherently Fi, but my particular approach to them is very Fi-flavored), may have come later, or perhaps along the way. And I probably could think of more if I really tried, but I think this is good. I don't really remember the info I worked off of. The WS Wiki has a decent description of Fe and Fi, along with good quadra descriptions; the latter is what really got me thinking ESI, as I've never identified with the less condemning, "see the potential good in people" Delta flavor of Fi but had never realized it was quite that central to the quadra. Socionics in the West has good material as well, and it has a great write-up on Fe-base. Expat, who I mentioned earlier, also has some good stuff on Fe and Fi.


----------



## nujabes

Hello fellow alphas :ninja:


----------



## Abraxas

Jabberbroccoli said:


> Dafuq is this quadra thing. Someone explain this.


Well, it all started with a sub-conscious transmission that a man named Carl Jung received from his alien overlords in outer space, which he proceeded to translate into a mystical-religious rant that he wrote down in a book called Liber Novus. He spent the rest of his life trying to better translate this space message and eventually came up with his theory of psychological functions.

Thus began the first phase of the invasion.

Soon enough, our suspicious friends, the Russians, found out about Jung and his alien sorcery, and quickly stole it for themselves, infusing it with thousands of years of Russian cynicism - like this:





Eventually this became Socionics as we know it today, which groups carbon-12 based organic specimens into four herds in order to facilitate and expedite the glorious day of the final harvesting.


----------



## nujabes

Bluity said:


> You can have playful and sarcastic humor. But for me, trollish humor is that level of hateful speech that masquerades as humor. It includes fat-shaming, homophobic slurs, or any joke whose sole purpose is to tear others down.


that's flaming, not trolling.

trolling is fun :kitteh:


----------



## Bluity

nujabes said:


> that's flaming, not trolling.


Trolling is the act of posting provocative, offensive, or blatantly false info to disrupt a conversation and provoke a response.

Flaming is name-calling and throwing personal insults, usually against someone that disagrees with you.

There is much overlap and over the course of a thread, one usually devolves into the other.

I used the phrase trollish humor because trolls troll for entertainment purposes. It's funny to them. As opposed to flamers who genuinely believe what they say and take the whole conversation personally.

Either way, neither one of these is funny to me.


----------



## nujabes

Bluity said:


> Trolling is the act of posting provocative, offensive, or blatantly false info to disrupt a conversation and provoke a response.
> 
> Flaming is name-calling and throwing personal insults, usually against someone that disagrees with you.
> 
> There is much overlap and over the course of a thread, one usually devolves into the other.
> 
> I used the phrase trollish humor because trolls troll for entertainment purposes. It's funny to them. As opposed to flamers who genuinely believe what they say and take the whole conversation personally.
> 
> Either way, neither one of these is funny to me.


trolling can be much more subtle and harmless, like this.


----------



## Bluity

nujabes said:


> trolling can be much more subtle and harmless, like this.


There's nothing subtle about this  I would consider this playful humor.


----------



## Abraxas

This is how I know I am not an alpha.

Me - I fucking love trolling; however, the more malicious and clever the better. Especially if it gets some do-goodie mook (who confuses himself for someone ethical when really he's just a coward with no self-awareness) to get all frustrated and riled up.

No shortage of those here on these forums either. I love it.

Stay mad.


----------



## zinnia

Abraxas said:


> This is how I know I am not an alpha.
> 
> Me - I fucking love trolling; however, the more malicious and clever the better. Especially if it gets some do-goodie mook (who confuses himself for someone ethical when really he's just a coward with no self-awareness) to get all frustrated and riled up.


I've been reading these forums for a few weeks now and I think I get the gist of the type of person you are describing... and I also think I have a vague idea of what your version of trolling is (though who knows, really? I have read only occasional posts of yours). Either way, if my ideas are correct, I will watch with amusement but I don't particularly like it or engage in it myself... even if someone is just being ridiculously stupid, I don't think I'd react in that way.



> Stay mad.


As long as I am not the target or thought it was completely undeserved, I doubt I'd be mad about it. Annoyed, maybe. I probably wouldn't even respond unless it was so awesomely clever I did not recognize it as trolling and believed it was an interesting topic of conversation...

<____<

lol paranoia


----------



## Kanerou

My mother's ESE, and she trolls in her own way.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Abraxas said:


> This is how I know I am not an alpha.
> 
> Me - I fucking love trolling; however, the more malicious and clever the better. Especially if it gets some do-goodie mook (who confuses himself for someone ethical when really he's just a coward with no self-awareness) to get all frustrated and riled up.
> 
> No shortage of those here on these forums either. I love it.
> 
> Stay mad.


----------



## Abraxas

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


>


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Abraxas said:


>


----------



## Kanerou

I think my boss at work is ESE. I don't have a strong argument for this, really. Rather, I realized my on first day of training that I was basically working for my mother, and my mother is ESE. To his credit, though, he's way more rational than she is, not the overreactive or overly emotional sort. He expects people to do their job well, but he doesn't bite people's head off for mistakes. As long as we're learning from our mistakes, we're good. He also welcomes questions, as he'd rather we ask and get it right than take a chance and mess it up. This mirrors my own way of thinking, and he thanks me from time to time for asking the questions I do. He's not stingy with praise or gratitude, but I don't feel like he's overdoing it either. I don't think I've ever had a bad boss, but I particularly like his approach to management.


----------



## ficsci

I am alpha
I am also omega


----------



## xlr8r

Strange LII is in Alpha.

Alpha is too extrovert for my tastes.


----------



## Chesire Tower

Due to some confusing Socionics tests; I had mistyped as an ILI which doesn't make sense; since my MBTI type is INTP; so I have retyped myself as an LII.

I remember when I first read the descriptions of all the Quadras; I knew that I related to Alpha the most. I guess I know why, now. =)


----------



## PlacentaCake

I just found out I am an ISFp. HELLO.


----------



## bombsaway

Yay! More SEIs! 

Welcome to the alpha hangout, guys.


----------



## itsme45

hey all, hope you don't mind if I bring up some older things about tests/typing  Typology is originally an alpha thing anyway, right? 




Abraxas said:


> IMO, the best way to go about it is to just take the following test:
> 
> Type indicator
> 
> And then whatever MBTI type you get from that, just go straight over to the exact same Socionics type, don't flip the J/P either. Ignore the functions, they don't really matter. It's a level of detail that isn't necessary. It's like taking your car to the mechanic and explaining what's wrong by describing hydrocarbons and thermodynamics instead of just saying "I think the spark plugs are out." The dichotomies are all you need. They are the macro-scale, functions are the micro-scale and aren't that important. When you build a house, you don't need to know the particle physics that describes the molecular structure of the wood. You just bang on nails and get it done.


I get ENTP from that test... I don't particularly like the questions here though. I had a hard time choosing between the words, especially as it was hard for me to disconnect the meaning of the words from how they sound... yeah that's just me, meh. And I believe that picking whatever words doesn't test for dichotomy preferences at all. Anyway in some dichotomy tests I do get N at 50-60% like this. In some other dichotomy tests I get ESTP. In every function measuring test I get ESTP or perhaps ISTP - either case it's low Ne so it's never ENTP. Definitely not ILE in socionics either.

So I'm not such a bad example for dichotomies not matching up with functions. Easy to explain though by noticing that it's hard for tests to keep the dichotomies completely separate from each other. E.g. a question meant to test I/E may "leak over" to F/T or a question meant to test S/N may mix with T/F. Tests that measure functions are more discrete in this sense. Hope this makes sense.

Of course, it's also a fact that Jung didn't truly mix I/E attitudes together with the other functions S, N, T and F. That muddles things more I'm sure. And let's not even start discussing MBTI J/P, that's so non-Jungian and so different. 

And then if you want to stick to the function model (JCF or socionics, whatever) then you will be making assumptions about the other functions after determining just one or two functions. That's being done without making sure that these assumptions are correct. This is a problem because it's not known how well the model fits reality. Anything less than 100% will result in muddying the waters when typing people 

All that does often create a difference between type by dichotomy and by functions.




Abraxas said:


> It's a copy of the standard Form M that you'd receive from a certified MBTI specialist.


Crappy form then -.- Sorry but those word choices are really useless. I mean, if you say they measured some correlations between answers to them and between type, sure it's ok, but that's just weak correlations then. I don't like weak correlations and don't like the part of psychology that goes by correlations of as low as 0.3-0.4 as being "good enough". Just no.




Kanerou said:


> A point where? Where he said the dichotomies (as in I/E, N/S, T/F, J/P or j/p) are better than the CFs (and, presumably, the IEs as well), or where he said that you can just import your type wholesale from MBTI? Because neither of those support what you're saying here. He never addressed Reinin that I saw.


Reinin is kind of unreliable isn't it? Correlations are known to be weak. I read somewhere that Reinin just made up the dichotomies from observations and no solid theory behind it. Read, correlations, not any causality! Not that I've ever managed to see a solid theory behind it anyway. 




Abraxas said:


> Okay, I know I said I'd drop it, but I hate watching people struggle.
> 
> It may help some of you to look into the NEO-PI-R test, I'm sure there's a few free online ones floating around.
> 
> The reason I suggest this is because, first of all, the NEO-PI-R is what you will be taught when you go to college and get a degree in depth psychology, specializing in personality theory. You may be taught the basics of MBTI, but only as a precursor to the Big 5, because the Big 5 is what is the most widely accepted model of personality type all over the world. Both MBTI and Socionics (being entirely "Jung-centric") completely leave out an empirically well established personality trait in the Big 5 (that Jung never thought of) called "neuroticism."


Thanks that was interesting.  I only did one Big5 test before but that wasn't anything official. That one I believe gave me absolute and not relative scores making me SCUEI. Going by that site, S = extraversion, C = calm, U = unorganized, E = nonaccommodating, I = curious/open. These NEO-PI-R ones score different. It scores me in percentiles against other females in my age group. That then makes me "not open" even though I always ticked stuff like "I'm interested in ideas", "I have imagination". Apparently if someone of my age and sex tends to tick the option "moderately true" (4 out of 5) that results in significantly lower than average openness. I really do not think of myself as not open though. -.- The other traits scored similarly to that other unofficial test, just a bit extreme here and there, uh, I guess its not news to me that I'm not the "average woman". 

Anyways.. SCUEI correlates with a calm ENTP, this new result with a calm ESTP. *shrug*

(found two free versions of NEO-PI-R by google, I can link to them if anyone wants them) 

One more thing. If this is the best test available then it's not great.  Sure it doesn't claim it's perfect but it gave me some assumptions based on the scores that are not quite true. Seems as good or bad as MBTI or socionics, tbh. Oh well, I have similar experiences with MMPI and CPI so hey.. 




> It is entirely possible that some of you might score a little above average in neuroticism and that would account for the minor discrepancies between yourself and the flat four-dichotomies type descriptions you're reading in both MBTI and Socionics.


Why would neuroticism have much to do with that? Though I think I kind of see your logic there, just don't agree. Tbh I don't believe in 5 neat factors covering everything either. They're not meant to, anyway.




> Just throwing it out there, because at least in my case, it almost completely corrects for the discrepancies between my actual personality and that of an ILI without even having to go into functions at all. Literally I can just break it down to introvert-irrational-thinker-intuitive and by adding on "slightly neurotic" - there's no more question in my mind that I've found my type.


That's completely OT but wonder how you changed from ILI to IEI. 




> In other words, a low score in conscientiousness is more or less the same thing as scoring high in irrationality/perception. A low score in extraversion is more or less the same thing as being introverted. A low score in openness is more or less being more of a sensation/concrete type. A low score in agreeableness more or less means you are a tough-minded thinker. One thing I actually like more about the Big 5 is that these dimensions don't perfectly cross over. You can be a thinker that scores rather high in openness because your thinking is more of an exploratory-theoretical kind, and also score high in agreeableness because that doesn't need to imply that you're not a nice person. It's always been one of my core points of contention with both MBTI and Socionics. These models would have you believe that just because you are a logical, hard-headed, point-of-fact kinda guy, you can't be a mushy, feely kinda guy as well who cries at the movies during the sappy parts and genuinely feels compassion for everyone and tries to promote harmony.


If I'm here already I might as well comment on this too though not so important, simply want to correct some little stuff here. Was just reading some Socionics LSI portrait, it says LSI is a pretty sentimental type.  A dominant Thinker type, yeah. Or, consider inferior Fe for Ti-doms in MBTI, it can be pretty crazy emotional. And so on. So it's not true that socionics or even MBTI claims that a thinker can't be mushy.


----------



## Kanerou

itsme45 said:


> Reinin is kind of unreliable isn't it? Correlations are known to be weak. I read somewhere that Reinin just made up the dichotomies from observations and no solid theory behind it. Read, correlations, not any causality! Not that I've ever managed to see a solid theory behind it anyway.


Try here. There is a mathematical foundation for the dichotomies. My understanding, however, is that Reinin basically just threw together everything he could and made groups out of it, kind of like taking a set of various colored and shaped blocks and then making groups based on any conceivable similarity you find. I basically see it as an interesting mental exercise but not horribly practical for typing.


----------



## itsme45

Kanerou said:


> Try here. There is a mathematical foundation for the dichotomies. My understanding, however, is that Reinin basically just threw together everything he could and made groups out of it, kind of like taking a set of various colored and shaped blocks and then making groups based on any conceivable similarity you find. I basically see it as an interesting mental exercise but not horribly practical for typing.


I saw that already but that either doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Yeah, I agree it's not too practical, in my own case either, not all the dichotomies match up (if I put all the reinin traits together that gives me no type)


----------



## LibertyPrime

T_T FINALLY! I figured it out! 8D I'm alpha quadra! Now to see if I'm ILE or SEI...ok that was easy.


----------



## zinnia

FreeBeer said:


>


Crap, I laughed wayy too much at that.  No more caffeine


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

I'm starting to seriously think I could be an ILE and want a different point of view besides my own and my boyfriend's, but I'm too lazy to fill out a questionnaire. 

Only thing is, I do not fit the socionics definition of an extrovert at all.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I'm starting to seriously think I could be an ILE and want a different point of view besides my own and my boyfriend's, but I'm too lazy to fill out a questionnaire.
> 
> Only thing is, I do not fit the socionics definition of an extrovert at all.


then why ILE?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> then why ILE?


I could make very good arguments for having all the IE elements in the the functions of where an ILE's would be, but right now I'm leaning more toward LII. I also have gotten along better with SEIs than ESEs, as well as showing many signs of being an irrational type, as well as rational. 

Either way, I think it's safe to say I'm a creative subtype.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I could make very good arguments for having all the IE elements in the the functions of where an ILE's would be, but right now I'm leaning more toward LII. I also have gotten along better with SEIs than ESEs, as well as showing many signs of being an irrational type, as well as rational.
> 
> Either way, I think it's safe to say I'm a creative subtype.


but then if you don't fit the definition of extravert why would Ne seem to be base function?

I think so far I've also got along better with EIE > IEI ...doesn't mean anything.

what do you see as irrational vs as rational in yourself?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> what do you see as irrational vs as rational in yourself?


In general, my mood is unstable as well as energy level and I act according to my current state of mind. I guess you could say somewhat impulsive. However, I more so think I'm a rational because I tend to immediately judge things via Ti and Fe and am more concentrated on the correctness of information than acquiring additional information. I'm also quite organized and like organization and neatness, unless it starts to bore me or I think it's unnecessary. 

Also, this is probably completely unrelated to the dichotomy, but I read somewhere that irrational types think in mental images, where as rationals think in words and speech. I'm definitely the latter.


I'm beginning to lightly consider Beta as well.


----------



## liminalthought

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I could make very good arguments for having all the IE elements in the the functions of where an ILE's would be, but right now I'm leaning more toward LII. I also have gotten along better with SEIs than ESEs, as well as showing many signs of being an irrational type, as well as rational.
> 
> Either way, I think it's safe to say I'm a creative subtype.


These are just my thoughts, but

Have you noticed that there is a certain higher degree of agreeableness or desire for progress with people of the creative subtype? I can really see a much higher degree of compromise in the creative subtype all done in order to get their program implemented somehow or someway.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

liminalthought said:


> These are just my thoughts, but
> 
> Have you noticed that there is a certain higher degree of agreeableness or desire for progress with people of the creative subtype? I can really see a much higher degree of compromise in the creative subtype all done in order to get their program implemented somehow or someway.


That's an interesting interpretation of the creative subtype. I think that would apply more to introverts than extroverts.


----------



## liminalthought

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> That's an interesting interpretation of the creative subtype. I think that would apply more to introverts than extroverts.


How do you think it would manifest with extroverts? Would they tone down somehow?
(I got the idea to this question from referencing this article after my first post: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/29-Subtypes-The-Empirical-Portrait-(translation))


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

liminalthought said:


> How do you think it would manifest with extroverts? Would they tone down somehow?
> (I got the idea to this question from referencing this article after my first post: Socionics - the16types.info - Subtypes: The Empirical Portrait (translation))


Skimming through it, I don't agree with the author of that article at all. 



But, I think the view point the base gives extroverts would go under heavier scrutiny or be more directly funneled by the creative function than what the base subtype of the same sociotype would go through.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> In general, my mood is unstable as well as energy level and I act according to my current state of mind. I guess you could say somewhat impulsive. However, I more so think I'm a rational because I tend to immediately judge things via Ti and Fe and am more concentrated on the correctness of information than acquiring additional information. I'm also quite organized and like organization and neatness, unless it starts to bore me or I think it's unnecessary.


Bores you to the point of discarding it? That sounds like me.  Sounds irrational.

But the other stuff doesn't exclude rational type. Just this one is strange 




> Also, this is probably completely unrelated to the dichotomy, but I read somewhere that irrational types think in mental images, where as rationals think in words and speech. I'm definitely the latter.


Huh. I don't think in either way that much. Interesting anyway. But yeah this wouldn't have to be definitive for type.




> I'm beginning to lightly consider Beta as well.


Ah why Beta?


----------



## liminalthought

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Skimming through it, I don't agree with the author of that article at all.
> 
> 
> 
> But, I think the view point the base gives extroverts would go under heavier scrutiny or be more directly funneled by the creative function than what the base subtype of the same sociotype would go through.


Ah, so like a finer focus. I can see what you mean by "funneling". 

In my head, I compare Bionic vs Ananael. Though they may not agree, only for my private record, I would say Bionic is the dominant subtype while Ananael the creative (both LIE, Te and Ni subtypes respectively). Making the connection between the concept of "funneling" you named, I've noticed that Ananael's postings/style/ideas come more "loaded" (for lack of a more respectful word). I think to myself, "could this be the Ni influence?" in the sense of Ni (or intuitive in general) influenced postings being "more than what they seem" or "layered". Maybe a kind of compression (Ni) of facts (Te), and so valid under the general "funneling" across the board of creative subtype extroverts. Or, actually, specifically among EJ extroverts. It is probably a different story other than "funneling" among EP extroverts.

(honestly, I was thinking about this comparison this morning)
(_mostly__ speculation, of course_)


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Also, this is probably completely unrelated to the dichotomy, but I read somewhere that irrational types think in mental images, where as rationals think in words and speech. I'm definitely the latter.


Probably unrelated because I think very much in words and speech. I'm very sure I'm irrational and I fit the irrational description extremely well, though I find that the rational-irrational descriptions are probably one of the most unreliable to go by when it comes to the basic dichotomies. If you haven't noticed, I change my subtype to Ni recently too. I realized something must be wrong when LIEs complain I utilize terminology soup. I don't think an LIE would think an ILI-Te would do that considering the greater emphasis placed on Te. Though I do categorize, but I admit it has an introverted slant to it as in, it looks more introverted because so much is filtered through Ni, which makes sense considering of how I understand the energy works for the various subtypes. 


> I'm beginning to lightly consider Beta as well.


Why do you consider beta? One thing I am not quite sure of when it comes to you is whether I actually agree with you being a creative subtype. Maybe it's that 1 fix, but your thinking is extremely rigid and categorical. Not that I think every ILE has to be Ne whimsical as I've spoken to a fair amount of ILE-Ti subtypes, but how do you justify Fe changing position if so? But the tl;dr version is that my overall impression of you has always been very Ti first, not Ne. Aside that, your cognition also seems introverted as in, more emphasis is placed on your internal perceptions than the external. An Ne base type would do the opposite, being extroverted. 

Also, what do you think of Gulenko's cognitive styles? I personally find them useful when one has the functions pinned down decently but is struggling to figure out which type one is exactly. It offers another tool to discern between say, LII and ILE since they utilize different cognitive styles.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> Why do you consider beta?


Just some characteristics in descriptions; nothing solid. 



ephemereality said:


> One thing I am not quite sure of when it comes to you is whether I actually agree with you being a creative subtype. Maybe it's that 1 fix, but your thinking is extremely rigid and categorical. Not that I think every ILE has to be Ne whimsical as I've spoken to a fair amount of ILE-Ti subtypes, but how do you justify Fe changing position if so? But the tl;dr version is that my overall impression of you has always been very Ti first, not Ne. Aside that, your cognition also seems introverted as in, more emphasis is placed on your internal perceptions than the external. An Ne base type would do the opposite, being extroverted.


This is a difference between me IRL and on the internet. Here, I have more time to perfect my words and make what I'm saying more logically sound. As for changing the Fe position, I sometimes do get annoyed with too much Fe, because I feel like it's hindering my ego IEs. I can't remember a time where I've gotten annoyed with someone initiating a comfortable environment, however, unless grandmothers who continually try to offer you food when you're stuffed counts. 



ephemereality said:


> Also, what do you think of Gulenko's cognitive styles? I personally find them useful when one has the functions pinned down decently but is struggling to figure out which type one is exactly. It offers another tool to discern between say, LII and ILE since they utilize different cognitive styles.


I stray away from anything that's not classical socionics. I even stray away from most of the interpretations of intertype relations and the Reinin dichotomies. I will look into it, though.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Just some characteristics in descriptions; nothing solid.


All right. If you are beta I can only see a good argument for LSI which doesn't really change your base.


> This is a difference between me IRL and on the internet. Here, I have more time to perfect my words and make what I'm saying more logically sound. As for changing the Fe position, I sometimes do get annoyed with too much Fe, because I feel like it's hindering my ego IEs. I can't remember a time where I've gotten annoyed with someone initiating a comfortable environment, however, unless grandmothers who continually try to offer you food when you're stuffed counts.


But wouldn't that drive itself attribute to a preference towards Ti? I mean, as an irrational type, on the question whether I bother to logically outline my arguments, yes, I do, clearly, since I always argue from the point of logic, but there is a point where my logic is only there to serve the idea I have in my mind so it's adequately conveyed. I can go back and edit if I find that my thinking was drastically shoddy for some reason or the other, or I just made a bunch of annoying typos, but I find it rare that I need to perfect anything with regards to thinking. I often find that it's difficult enough to just get the idea out there when it's of more complex nature. It becomes a matter of I know what I mean and I know what it is but I don't know how I express it properly. Ergo that my posts can sometimes be far lengthier than they might need to be. 

With that said, that nitpick of yours is likely also attributed to 1 fix so again, it's difficult to discern. I find that with enneagram and cognition, they create this blend where they synergize into the person one is so one can't quite remove one from the other. I for example see how Se correlates to moving towards 8 as an integration point (becoming one with the world, becoming physically active, taking charge...) so you can't just go around and change my fix. It would create an entirely different person. So the way I see it, if you are an LII you are Ti sub, but ILE Ti sub, because it neatly correlates with that 1 fix and perhaps 6 wing too. 

Aside that, why does too much Fe annoy you? Though I think I know what you mean but it applies more to how I understand Fi. There's a point where Fi base types just grow too Fi stubborn for my own tastes and I wish they were more flexible.


> I stray away from anything that's not classical socionics. I even stray away from most of the interpretations of intertype relations and the Reinin dichotomies. I will look into it, though.


Fair enough.


----------



## Entropic

Abraxas said:


> This is how I know I am not an alpha.
> 
> Me - I fucking love trolling; however, the more malicious and clever the better. Especially if it gets some do-goodie mook (who confuses himself for someone ethical when really he's just a coward with no self-awareness) to get all frustrated and riled up.
> 
> No shortage of those here on these forums either. I love it.
> 
> Stay mad.


Come back to gamma, yo.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> Aside that, why does too much Fe annoy you? Though I think I know what you mean but it applies more to how I understand Fi. There's a point where Fi base types just grow too Fi stubborn for my own tastes and I wish they were more flexible.


Introverted and extroverted logic reasoning is sometimes interpreted as emotional hostility by Fe bases.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Introverted and extroverted logic reasoning is sometimes interpreted as emotional hostility by Fe bases.


And why does this bother you?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> And why does this bother you?


because it's not emotional hostility, it's truth.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> This is a difference between me IRL and on the internet. Here, I have more time to perfect my words and make what I'm saying more logically sound.


Such a good point. I'm also very different with this online. Seems when sitting at a PC I can focus more on internal logic of stuff than I normally would. IRL it feels like my err, information channels or whatever are already loaded by other stuff. Of course I still use logic IRL but it's not done in such a continuous fashion or if it is, because it's a discussion or something that requires it, then I explicitly need to "tune out" a bit from environment. It's not a bad feeling or anything, it's just very consciously done. 

Are you like this too? Or is it just the time factor for you that makes online discussions different?




> As for changing the Fe position, I sometimes do get annoyed with too much Fe, because I feel like it's hindering my ego IEs.


Like when?




ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Introverted and extroverted logic reasoning is sometimes interpreted as emotional hostility by Fe bases.


Oh yeah :/ It bothers me too at times. To avoid that issue I would have to take half an hour to perfect something I'd say immediately by default. And even after that I'm sure I would still offend some people. And frankly when I'm in the mood to say things by using raw blunt logic that's just not a mood conducive to changing to Fe focus and smooth the edge especially if that means dropping some actual content. It's clearly a different focus on different stuff (different information socionics-wise).




> Also, this is probably completely unrelated to the dichotomy, but I read somewhere that irrational types think in mental images, where as rationals think in words and speech. I'm definitely the latter.


I'm quoting this again because I just remembered one thing that kind of goes against this idea. I can put my internal logic into mental images. So, out the window goes this idea of correlating irrational/rational to such mental encodings of content.

(And no I don't think that's Ni with the mental image stuff)


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> Such a good point. I'm also very different with this online. Seems when sitting at a PC I can focus more on internal logic of stuff than I normally would. IRL it feels like my err, information channels or whatever are already loaded by other stuff. Of course I still use logic IRL but it's not done in such a continuous fashion or if it is, because it's a discussion or something that requires it, then I explicitly need to "tune out" a bit from environment. It's not a bad feeling or anything, it's just very consciously done.
> 
> Are you like this too? Or is it just the time factor for you that makes online discussions different?


It's both, but mostly the thing you described. I can think much better when there's not much going on around me and I can fully concentrate on whatever I'm trying to logically analyze and communicate. I wish I was naturally a better orator and could use my critical thinking skills when I'm having a debate with a professor as well as I can when alone reading a book. I've been continually improving myself in this sense for the past 4 years, and have gotten much better at it, but it goes against some of my fundamental psychological nature to not be able to concentrate on it and it alone for as long as needed (curse my introversion and deficiency of experience outside of my room, from younger years).



itsme45 said:


> Like when?


Like when Fe bases irrationally perceive logical examination and/or presentation of facts as emotional hostility. 



itsme45 said:


> Oh yeah :/ It bothers me too at times. To avoid that issue I would have to take half an hour to perfect something I'd say immediately by default. And even after that I'm sure I would still offend some people. And frankly when I'm in the mood to say things by using raw blunt logic that's just not a mood conducive to changing to Fe focus and smooth the edge especially if that means dropping some actual content. It's clearly a different focus on different stuff (different information socionics-wise).


Those people should not irrationally get offended by emotionally neutral logical examination. The responsibility does not lie at your feet to try to minimize possibility of it being perceived as emotional hostility.


----------



## Entropic

Ni can provide wack mental images but for most of the part, I don't think in terms of images. If I would, I think my cognition would appear even stranger even to myself. Essentially my visual thinking when I don't control it much and just let it develop on its own akin to Jung's idea of active imagination (I've done that too) is that it's similar to the Youtuber cyriak's videos. He's likely an IEI. And active imagination is like dreaming when you're awake. I can also get very strong visual impressions of people when I choose to explore their personalities. One guy I associated as a clockmaker which begun as a lot of visuals based on his character appearing as clocks, representing time and so on. Another person was more like a forest where sun never shone and kept moving around so if you got lost inside you never got out again. Outside of this, I really need to actively think in terms of images to think in images. 

Actually scratch it that it may seem strange to myself. Clearly it's not though I can see why others would find it as such. In retrospect I wish I was more of a visual thinker. Then perhaps I could meaningfully pursue some kind of visual artist hobby where I could envision these ideas physically somehow. Though there's also an issue overall where I need to produce something of physical nature where it just never seems to live up what appeared as in my head. 

What Ni does however, is that I can see a bunch of birds taking flight from atop a large apartment building roof and fly into the distance and I just go "oooh". It just leaves this very strong meaningful impression behind that I cannot put into words. The closest thing I think I can ever come to capturing that sense is something akin to spirituality honestly, without it being so. So with regards to the beta consideration, I think at some level even an LSI or SLE would experience this at some point but perhaps not as evidently. Maybe not? 

So you experience yourself that greatly apart from the internet? I find that people often get the wrong impression of me when it comes to how I behave on the internet is that I'm more talkative, more active and more forceful. IRL I'm often very unnoticed and most of the stuff I voice here is something most people who know me IRL don't know anything about. There is a very clear line between what I experience as mental content and physical content. If there was no internet I think people would be surprised when/if I did mention anything about my thoughts since they would honestly have no idea. 

So overall, the thinking remains the same. I just vocalize it more clearly.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> So you experience yourself that greatly apart from the internet?


Could you rephrase that? I don't understand. 

I don't think any differently on the internet than in IRL, other than being able to utilize Ti better and express myself more clearly.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> It's both, but mostly the thing you described. I can think much better when there's not much going on around me and I can fully concentrate on whatever I'm trying to logically analyze and communicate. I wish I was naturally a better orator and could use my critical thinking skills when I'm having a debate with a professor as well as I can when alone reading a book. I've been continually improving myself in this sense for the past 4 years, and have gotten much better at it, but it goes against some of my fundamental psychological nature to not be able to concentrate on it and it alone for as long as needed (curse my introversion and deficiency of experience outside of my room, from younger years).


I see, well, I can still use my skills when debating IRL, I'm just not so inclined to use Ti so much at once.

Also, I don't often really do it all alone, here online I use discussions to get myself thinking, it just feels better that way 

I can think alone too, just more draining.




> Like when Fe bases irrationally perceive logical examination and/or presentation of facts as emotional hostility.


Yeah but anything else?




> Those people should not irrationally get offended by emotionally neutral logical examination. The responsibility does not lie at your feet to try to minimize possibility of it being perceived as emotional hostility.


Yes. Btw some of these situations can already be emotionally loaded which doesn't help. :/




ephemereality said:


> Ni can provide wack mental images (...)


Hehe cool examples. I don't do that sort of thing when I have mental images. It's either about logical structure in an abstract image or if it's about something like your examples, then it's still just making up some abstract image about whatever. Nothing concrete like a forest in your examples though it still retains such qualities (e.g. forest can be dark and deep and then those qualities are kept). And it's pretty rare anyway that I make such images.

I once had a stressful period that was honestly a new experience to me, having so much stress emotionally, but anyway I did have some more concrete imagery then and it was definitely Ni-like, symbolic ancient shit. I felt like I didn't really want to have that going on all the time :S It was too upsetting after a while.

With my normal self if it's concrete imagery then it's about a story, not analogies of life things etc. So it's a controllable thing then as it's a story that I can imagine/tell in whatever way I want. I like doing that sometimes.




> What Ni does however, is that I can see a bunch of birds taking flight from atop a large apartment building roof and fly into the distance and I just go "oooh". It just leaves this very strong meaningful impression behind that I cannot put into words. The closest thing I think I can ever come to capturing that sense is something akin to spirituality honestly, without it being so. So with regards to the beta consideration, I think at some level even an LSI or SLE would experience this at some point but perhaps not as evidently. Maybe not?


I think you got this one right. 




> So you experience yourself that greatly apart from the internet?


Yep if you asked me. 

Take Fe as an example, IRL I'm a lot less initiating with that sort of stuff. It's easier to write smilies online and do other stuff like that.  Though I'm told I'm smiley IRL too sometimes when I don't notice it so whatever. Maybe it's just unconscious then and online I can read myself back and see what I was actually being like, making it more conscious.  But no, definitely, I'm less initiating in terms of social stuff IRL.

Talking in general is also different IRL, I don't focus so much on just verbal content but everything else and I'm a lot less verbal overall IRL. I can prefer other things to talking.

As for being more active, what did you mean? Just more talking? As I said I'm less active IRL socially unless someone does draw me in, which is what I meant by doing less initiative but it's otherwise a more active life, not just sitting at a PC...




> If there was no internet I think people would be surprised when/if I did mention anything about my thoughts since they would honestly have no idea.


I kind of relate to that with all the differences I have online vs IRL. 




> So overall, the thinking remains the same. I just vocalize it more clearly.


For me the thinking is different too as I said. Maybe it's just that I use it for different things.


----------



## cyamitide

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Also, this is probably completely unrelated to the dichotomy, but I read somewhere that irrational types think in mental images, where as rationals think in words and speech. I'm definitely the latter.


I've already investigated this among the people I am familiar with and it hasn't been proven to be true. 

Most notably I know an ILI and a SLI who are very adept conversationalists and who have confirmed that they mostly think in words and verbal constructions instead of imagery. My attempts to link Socionics types to visualizing styles haven't shown there to be any direct correlations.


----------



## liminalthought

cyamitide said:


> I've already investigated this among the people I am familiar with and it hasn't been proven to be true.
> 
> 
> Most notably I know an ILI and a SLI who are very adept conversationalists and who have confirmed that they mostly think in words and verbal constructions instead of imagery. My attempts to link Socionics types to visualizing styles haven't shown there to be any direct correlations.



Isn't this them using Te? I would guess those are the ones who've got a good hold of their second dominant function. It's hard to put Ni into words at all, so what mostly comes out is what's been filtered through Te. Ni subtypes don't elaborate much as give short witty answers every so often, they mostly stay quite and observe. If you disturb or arouse them from thought, they will start to respond with Te. 


I would say I think in words and verbal constructions when I'm producing something (an argument, a rule, an option, a system, in general a presentation _in response to_, not of, whatever I perceived)


The sensation or insights (Si/Ni) does/do not come out and are only relevant to the specific person because that is what they sense or see.


For example, I can really understand your presentation of things (I like the way you organize your postings) but, as you will notice, my insight and experience stays with me and yours stay with you. I cannot see your experience or what it meant to you, but the product and presentation of your ideas as a result of that experience makes sense.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Could you rephrase that? I don't understand.
> 
> I don't think any differently on the internet than in IRL, other than being able to utilize Ti better and express myself more clearly.


I mean if there is a great difference in how you appear online and IRL since you expressed you seem more logical online. If so, I was curious how great the difference is since it's relevant to know since you're considering whether you're an extroverted type or not.

I guess this is also know we know I'm not a Ti type lol. Clear communication isn't honestly my best strength in text. 



itsme45 said:


> I see, well, I can still use my skills when debating IRL, I'm just not so inclined to use Ti so much at once.


I actually think that I Te more IRL when I engage with other people. Usually, it's because aside regular conversation, when I utilize some form of logics it tends to be in the form of explanations. So let's say I explain personality type to someone, I'll go all the way back and explain Jung etc and the ideas he laid out. I actually find it a little easier explaining things IRL because talking goes faster. The time it takes me to formulate a couple of paragraphs online could be better spent so IRL I would already have laid out the ground structure. There's also the part where I find that with online conversation and especially when it comes to writing larger blocks of text that describe some known idea, is that there is always the structure to the idea. 

Structure is something that didn't come naturally to me initially (when I was my teens people complained that nothing I wrote really made much sense because my structuring of text was so poor, which included writing paragraph sentences) but it's something I've learned more over time. Nowadays, when I write academically I spend a great deal on structure though I find in this regard Te and Ti really differs. Te is more about the logical presentation, that it all follows a logical flow so this idea structurally follows this idea and ends up with this conclusion. Ti, at least from what I understand it, is more concerned about the grammar details and such, this is the kind of structure it deals with. So my academic writing is nowadays often very "flashy" and I've been told that it's very pleasing to look at and easy to navigate. 

I think it's true that Te types write the best handbooks in this sense, because very good use of Te can take information and streamline it in such a way that makes it very easy to understand (at least to other Te types, I guess those that strongly devalue Te might not value this structure regardless).


> Also, I don't often really do it all alone, here online I use discussions to get myself thinking, it just feels better that way


Ah yes, so very different. My SEE friend told me yesterday that was she was a little envious of my thinking, that it seemed beautiful to her. And it's ironic because she's quite good at reading people and get what she wants, as she expressed it. And this is pretty much the thing I absolutely don't know how to do. I can spend all day thinking but I never get anything done.


> I can think alone too, just more draining.


What do you mean by that? 


> Hehe cool examples. I don't do that sort of thing when I have mental images. It's either about logical structure in an abstract image or if it's about something like your examples, then it's still just making up some abstract image about whatever. Nothing concrete like a forest in your examples though it still retains such qualities (e.g. forest can be dark and deep and then those qualities are kept). And it's pretty rare anyway that I make such images.


Yes, I don't understand when people say logic is abstract, I honestly don't. Like RosoDude was talking about how he can imagine the dining hall at his campus as a vector image, and as much as this skill sounds really cool I don't understand how this works at all. If I see people sitting in a dining hall the patterns I observe are different as I think it's far less about logic but about the intent as to why these groups. Assuming I notice the people at all at a conscious level, which I'm likely not to. 



> I once had a stressful period that was honestly a new experience to me, having so much stress emotionally, but anyway I did have some more concrete imagery then and it was definitely Ni-like, symbolic ancient shit. I felt like I didn't really want to have that going on all the time :S It was too upsetting after a while.


What kind of symbolic ancient shit? Though I guess the process is similar but reverse in that when I get really stressed up or just tired in general, I can start getting over-focused on physical stimuli around me. I think I mentioned it before. It's like I suddenly notice all this shit around me and I can't shut it out. In general, when I kind of consciously notice something, like the existence of my cats as in, I notice they are real and actually there rather than some things that happened to be there and I know are there but I don't really feel their presence or notice it, they feel strangely real and alive. Like they actually exist in physical form. 


> With my normal self if it's concrete imagery then it's about a story, not analogies of life things etc. So it's a controllable thing then as it's a story that I can imagine/tell in whatever way I want. I like doing that sometimes.


More like daydreaming?


> I think you got this one right.


So you've had similar experiences like that? I suppose the difference is that I actively seek these out as a normal part of my cognition, that experience. 



> Take Fe as an example, IRL I'm a lot less initiating with that sort of stuff. It's easier to write smilies online and do other stuff like that.  Though I'm told I'm smiley IRL too sometimes when I don't notice it so whatever. Maybe it's just unconscious then and online I can read myself back and see what I was actually being like, making it more conscious.  But no, definitely, I'm less initiating in terms of social stuff IRL.


Huh, interesting. Why is that? Is it because being anonymous makes it easier or?



> Talking in general is also different IRL, I don't focus so much on just verbal content but everything else and I'm a lot less verbal overall IRL. I can prefer other things to talking.


More like actual concrete thinking? Perhaps akin to kinaesthetic?



> As for being more active, what did you mean? Just more talking?


Being more active as talking more and so on. Not just talking, but appearing active in general. 



> As I said I'm less active IRL socially unless someone does draw me in, which is what I meant by doing less initiative but it's otherwise a more active life, not just sitting at a PC...


Yeah, I think that's also part what I mean. I don't appear very active IRL but extremely inert. Last time I went somewhere was this Friday because I had to go grocery shop among other things. I rarely leave my home if I can choose not to. 



> For me the thinking is different too as I said. Maybe it's just that I use it for different things.


What do you mean?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> Yeah but anything else?


When you try to give rational (not in socionics terminology) advice on their personal issues, they might explode and antagonize you for no reason, but I guess that ties in with logical examination being perceived as emotional hostility. 



ephemereality said:


> I mean if there is a great difference in how you appear online and IRL since you expressed you seem more logical online. If so, I was curious how great the difference is since it's relevant to know since you're considering whether you're an extroverted type or not.


I'm not less logical, I just can't articulate as well as I'd like to be able to. And I'm slower with it, because there are other things my mind is concentrated on. I think this points to introversion more than anything.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I'm not less logical, I just can't articulate as well as I'd like to be able to. And I'm slower with it, because there are other things my mind is concentrated on. I think this points to introversion more than anything.


Do you mean cognitive or social introversion?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> Do you mean cognitive or social introversion?


I think they're generally dependent of each other, but cognitive


----------



## itsme45

liminalthought said:


> Isn't this them using Te? I would guess those are the ones who've got a good hold of their second dominant function. It's hard to put Ni into words at all, so what mostly comes out is what's been filtered through Te. Ni subtypes don't elaborate much as give short witty answers every so often, they mostly stay quite and observe. If you disturb or arouse them from thought, they will start to respond with Te.


Did you see my earlier post about how Ti information can be presented in the form of mental images for me? I think that really refutes this theory

Consider also how there's another theory floating around that's maybe from Lenore Thomson and it says that Ji/Pe types have holistic functions in the right hemisphere not thinking in words. The theory is of course probably BS in its current form but I'm just saying there's more than one theory on this and it's conflicting with this one in the case of JiPe types.

Oh and... Jung also said Ti can have mental images, I think.




ephemereality said:


> I actually think that I Te more IRL when I engage with other people. Usually, it's because aside regular conversation, when I utilize some form of logics it tends to be in the form of explanations. So let's say I explain personality type to someone, I'll go all the way back and explain Jung etc and the ideas he laid out. I actually find it a little easier explaining things IRL because talking goes faster. The time it takes me to formulate a couple of paragraphs online could be better spent so IRL I would already have laid out the ground structure. There's also the part where I find that with online conversation and especially when it comes to writing larger blocks of text that describe some known idea, is that there is always the structure to the idea.


Oh heh I dunno why the difference. Talking is faster yes but that's exactly why I feel it's less suited to lay out complex explanations, in my case anyway.




> Structure is something that didn't come naturally to me initially (when I was my teens people complained that nothing I wrote really made much sense because my structuring of text was so poor, which included writing paragraph sentences) but it's something I've learned more over time. Nowadays, when I write academically I spend a great deal on structure though I find in this regard Te and Ti really differs. Te is more about the logical presentation, that it all follows a logical flow so this idea structurally follows this idea and ends up with this conclusion. Ti, at least from what I understand it, is more concerned about the grammar details and such, this is the kind of structure it deals with. So my academic writing is nowadays often very "flashy" and I've been told that it's very pleasing to look at and easy to navigate.


I think I mentioned it somewhere else before but my papers at university do have that kind of logical flow and I got praise for that. Now I don't know how long it takes for Te types to produce that sort of paper, for me it was always the first phase of writing the paper, that is, information gathering and structuring it in my head that took longest. Once I had that in my head (structured _wordless_ by the way, yes without using words, just another note to @_liminalthought_ here), I just needed to sit down and the flow came on its own just fine so I would write up the paper relatively fast. But yes, I was also concerned with how this flow was structured in the writing.

What is that flashy stuff like, is it the visual layout?




> I think it's true that Te types write the best handbooks in this sense, because very good use of Te can take information and streamline it in such a way that makes it very easy to understand (at least to other Te types, I guess those that strongly devalue Te might not value this structure regardless).


I don't know if that's Te, I do like it though. I just process it differently in my head when I actually store what I read. Not a streamlined way 




> Ah yes, so very different. My SEE friend told me yesterday that was she was a little envious of my thinking, that it seemed beautiful to her. And it's ironic because she's quite good at reading people and get what she wants, as she expressed it. And this is pretty much the thing I absolutely don't know how to do. I can spend all day thinking but I never get anything done.


Glad you found true duality hahaha.




> What do you mean by that?


Just feel too understimulated, lower energy, being "tuned out" isn't a great feeling to me after a while. When I'm discussing some topic with others that's more interactive and that helps or just the cognitive load is better distributed, I don't know.




> Yes, I don't understand when people say logic is abstract, I honestly don't. Like RosoDude was talking about how he can imagine the dining hall at his campus as a vector image, and as much as this skill sounds really cool I don't understand how this works at all. If I see people sitting in a dining hall the patterns I observe are different as I think it's far less about logic but about the intent as to why these groups. Assuming I notice the people at all at a conscious level, which I'm likely not to.


Ohh that about RosoDude's thinking does sound pretty cool and I understand how that works and can do it but I don't really do it IRL most of the time. Just Se instead.




> What kind of symbolic ancient shit?


Well certain general symbols, of ancient and magical topics. Think Jung's collective unconscious is related to that. I really don't like to get deep in that sort of stuff by default so you can imagine why I said I had enough after a while  But first I didn't even realise what was going on as it was all a new thing to me, that stress. It wasn't too bad until I figured out that something was up. I had them coming up just from stuff around me, even just some everyday stuff that by default I just take in with Se. This was pretty different and yeah this was a good example of mental imagery going on.




> Though I guess the process is similar but reverse in that when I get really stressed up or just tired in general, I can start getting over-focused on physical stimuli around me. I think I mentioned it before. It's like I suddenly notice all this shit around me and I can't shut it out. In general, when I kind of consciously notice something, like the existence of my cats as in, I notice they are real and actually there rather than some things that happened to be there and I know are there but I don't really feel their presence or notice it, they feel strangely real and alive. Like they actually exist in physical form.


Yeah that sounds like the reverse. I don't know if my experience adds anything to any theory here but I experienced this for a short time when I was coming back to normal from immersion in the above described mental imagery of symbolic stuff. I never experience sensory overload by default, I'm not sensitive to it but when I came back to my normal state I got that for a few minutes here and there and got this too about strangely over-focusing to stuff around me. 




> More like daydreaming?


No, I don't call it daydreaming, it's nothing to do with myself, my reality, just story telling for fun like when reading an interesting fiction book. I even wrote some such fiction. Maybe I'll get back into it.




> So you've had similar experiences like that? I suppose the difference is that I actively seek these out as a normal part of my cognition, that experience.


Exactly.




> Huh, interesting. Why is that? Is it because being anonymous makes it easier or?


No, not to do with being anonymous. I think I just have fewer unconscious negative expectations. Though I can still have some. Btw that's again more jungian than socionics.... I mean socionics never talks about how superid can have a certain kind of negativity to it, right? But for me it fits. (It's a different kind of negative stuff than superego)




> More like actual concrete thinking? Perhaps akin to kinaesthetic?


Yes you put it very well again 




> What do you mean?


What you just said  (the previous quoted line above)




ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I'm not less logical, I just can't articulate as well as I'd like to be able to. And I'm slower with it, because there are other things my mind is concentrated on. I think this points to introversion more than anything.


What other things? Why's that introversion in your opinion?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> What other things?


Things going on in the environment. Stimuli. 



> Why's that introversion in your opinion?


because it fits the definition of introversion and is supported by scientific studies done on introversion.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Things going on in the environment. Stimuli.


But if you're an introverted type you'd easily shut that out no? Maybe I'm wrong about that...




> because it fits the definition of introversion and is supported by scientific studies done on introversion.


Explain a bit more?


----------



## Entropic

itsme45 said:


> Oh heh I dunno why the difference. Talking is faster yes but that's exactly why I feel it's less suited to lay out complex explanations, in my case anyway.


Also, when I talk I can auto-correct myself and go back and explain something I missed and people can still follow. More difficult in text. That's what I mean that text requires a different structure, though apparently, I still tend to give people a headache when I am explaining as to why that happened and led to this thing and eventually no one can follow it anymore lol.



> I think I mentioned it somewhere else before but my papers at university do have that kind of logical flow and I got praise for that. Now I don't know how long it takes for Te types to produce that sort of paper, for me it was always the first phase of writing the paper, that is, information gathering and structuring it in my head that took longest. Once I had that in my head (structured _wordless_ by the way, yes without using words, just another note to @_liminalthought_ here), I just needed to sit down and the flow came on its own just fine so I would write up the paper relatively fast. But yes, I was also concerned with how this flow was structured in the writing.


Hm, when I write a paper, I think I definitely spend most time trying to organize my thoughts in a way that actually makes sense to other people and provides a strong argument since that is the purpose of the paper. Though my field of study always allowed a lot of personal injection since I preferred symbol analysis so I really spent a lot of time digging myself into what this idea represents because that is what I ultimately enjoyed doing.


> What is that flashy stuff like, is it the visual layout?


Yes, my layouts are all very visual.


> I don't know if that's Te, I do like it though. I just process it differently in my head when I actually store what I read. Not a streamlined way


Makes sense. Well, I think it could be Te in that it ultimately appeals to common knowledge and systems, what is collectively agreed upon.


> Glad you found true duality hahaha.


lol



> Just feel too understimulated, lower energy, being "tuned out" isn't a great feeling to me after a while. When I'm discussing some topic with others that's more interactive and that helps or just the cognitive load is better distributed, I don't know.


Hm, interesting.


> Ohh that about RosoDude's thinking does sound pretty cool and I understand how that works and can do it but I don't really do it IRL most of the time. Just Se instead.


I wonder if it's common for Ti types to think this way in general.


> Well certain general symbols, of ancient and magical topics. Think Jung's collective unconscious is related to that. I really don't like to get deep in that sort of stuff by default so you can imagine why I said I had enough after a while  But first I didn't even realise what was going on as it was all a new thing to me, that stress. It wasn't too bad until I figured out that something was up. I had them coming up just from stuff around me, even just some everyday stuff that by default I just take in with Se. This was pretty different and yeah this was a good example of mental imagery going on.


Interesting. What images did you experience if you got an example?


> No, I don't call it daydreaming, it's nothing to do with myself, my reality, just story telling for fun like when reading an interesting fiction book. I even wrote some such fiction. Maybe I'll get back into it.


Ok.


> No, not to do with being anonymous. I think I just have fewer unconscious negative expectations. Though I can still have some. Btw that's again more jungian than socionics.... I mean socionics never talks about how superid can have a certain kind of negativity to it, right? But for me it fits. (It's a different kind of negative stuff than superego)


Yes, I do think the super-id block is painted in a more positive light in that they don't incorporate Jung's idea of how it relates to complexes, though on the other hand, I can see why the super-id could still be seen in a negative light in _oneself_ though not necessarily _in others_, experiencing a compensatory effect. If we did not experience some kind of negativity around our super-id at all, then why don't we just go ahead and utilize those functions?


----------



## liminalthought

itsme45 said:


> Did you see my earlier post about how Ti information can be presented in the form of mental images for me? I think that really refutes this theory
> 
> Consider also how there's another theory floating around that's maybe from Lenore Thomson and it says that Ji/Pe types have holistic functions in the right hemisphere not thinking in words. The theory is of course probably BS in its current form but I'm just saying there's more than one theory on this and it's conflicting with this one in the case of JiPe types.
> 
> Oh and... Jung also said Ti can have mental images, I think.


Let's not resort to Jung, this isn't the cognitive functions forum. It will be more difficult if we mix theories.

Just for the record, images/imaginations are involved: 

*Jung*
http://personalitycafe.com/intj-art...on-introverted-intuitve-type-ni-dominant.html

*Socionics*
Introduction to Ni

Introverted intuition is an introverted, irrational, and dynamic information element. It is also called Ni, T, temporal intuition, or white intuition. Ni is generally associated with the ability to recognize the unfolding of processes over time (how one event leads to another), *have visions of the past and future, develop mental imagery, and see intangible hints of relationships between processes or objects.* Types that value Ni always like to have in mind a specific plan for how their life will develop in the future. Thus they have little time for the concept of "living for the moment" or "making the best of the present". They generally engage in pure leisure activities only for short periods of time, and even then their leisure activities generally involve a psychologically demanding or competitive aspect.

Socionics Information Elements: Ni

-------------------------
What seems to be going around is a misunderstanding between Ne, Ti, and Ni. Some here who think they have Ni are actually great idea generators (Ne) or/and are very thorough analysts (Ti)

Introduction to Ne

Extroverted intuition is an extroverted, irrational, and static information element. It is also called Ne, I, intuition of possibilities, or black intuition.

Ne is generally associated with the ability to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize talent and natural propensities in others, reconcile differing perspectives and viewpoints, rapidly generate ideas, and be led by one's intellectual curiosity and stimulate curiosity in others.

Types that value Ne prefer to try out an opportunity rather than consider all possible ways in which it could not work out. They pick a few options and stick with them, in contrast to introverted intuition (Ni) types who pick one option and continue to doubt that option. They enjoy discussing unusual insights into the nature of the world and crazy out-there ideas, like space elevators. *Typical Ne quadra humor juxtaposes seemingly unrelated phenomena.*

http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/information_elements/Ne#sthash.S3TG3RaC.dpuf

Themes of Ti: 

Ti: analysis, hierarchy, classification, understanding, order, system, structure, formal logic
----------------------

It seems that Ti users hold a certain image in place (as opposed to just having visions), wishing to justify and shape it with their own logic

"For, as in the former case the purely empirical heaping together of facts paralyses thought and smothers their meaning, so in the latter case introverted thinking* shows a dangerous tendency [p. 482] to coerce facts into the shape of its image, or by ignoring them altogether, to unfold its phantasy image in freedom*."
http://personalitycafe.com/intp-art...on-introverted-thinking-type-ti-dominant.html

This is may also explain why Ti users are so allergic to facts (Te), as the article mentions. 
Socionics takes it a step further _*into the life* of the person_: 


*Ti*

This is my own logic, my understanding, explanation, description, concept, theory.* The hierarchy of concepts that closer that further above that below. That's what I was taught, my picture of the world, my world. This is my education, ie the system of my images, my school. 

[this is the life product of this: *_to coerce facts into the shape of its image, and the rest of Ti article by Jung_]

My own understanding, my description of the world, my school. "My logic - the logic of the best in the world." Robespierre's hard to convince of anything, if that "something" does not match the system performances. And he himself explained his system of ideas is difficult.

Ti as leading function in LSI (ISTj; Maxim Gorky) and LII (INTj; Robespierre) - very attached to his understanding of something, his thinking, his logic and concepts, confident and conservative in these. It is impossible to convince him otherwise, as he "lives" by this, but does not necessarily share his understanding with others. If his understanding does not converge with facts, then at times he will judge the facts to be of lower value. Any attempts at criticizing his understanding make him feel irritated.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/193-Aspects-in-the-Valued-Functions-Dmitry-Golihov
------------------
This whole post is me doing this: 

"Ni is generally associated with the ability to recognize the unfolding of processes over time (how one event leads to another), have visions of the past and future, develop mental imagery, and *see intangible hints of relationships between processes or objects*." (From the Ni reference before)


----------



## Entropic

@liminalthought, I think you take that description of Ni a bit too literally. Does Ni result in imaginary? Yes, but it doesn't have to be actual mental images that you visually see in your mind like visual thinking. The imaginary of Ni can also be in the form of very strong impressions of something being meaningful because the impressions are of archetypal character. By imaginary, it relates to imagination, not images. This is because Jung actually described intuition this way. 

So if your conclusions are true, then every visual thinker is an Ni type and I don't think that's very true, since you could equally argue that all Se types should be visual thinkers being so focused on the environment.

As for this...



> This whole post is me doing this:


I don't think that's true lol, honestly. I don't see how you are trying to see intangible hints of relationships between processes or objects as much as you just seem to quote some sources and then point out some specific phrases that you think are of importance to justify your thinking. 

It actually seems much closer to this:



> This is my own logic, my understanding, explanation, description, concept, theory. The hierarchy of concepts that closer that further above that below. That's what I was taught, my picture of the world, my world. This is my education, ie the system of my images, my school.


You are forcing data to fit into an idea of how the world should be, because it fits your logical model. You aren't describing cause and effect between events, ideas, or objects, but you are simply trying to pigeonhole how you think Ni types have to be visual thinkers that likely coincides because you identify yourself as a visual thinker. So you therefore draw the logical conclusion that since you yourself as a visual thinker and you identify as an Ni type, and you can even find some weak claims in the Ni description that Ni type thinks in images, it just further reinforces your idea that you are an Ni type and what Ni types are supposed to be. You are basing type on your own thinking which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but that assumes you have properly identified your thinking and understand how it operates. 

See, I was making a prediction about your character there, which is a much better example of how Ni operates, because I am explaining a relationship that I see regarding your thinking pattern where I see a connection between the things you claim here. 

I am not trying to pigeonhole you into an idea that I have, but I am simply describing what it is I am observing regarding this particular post of yours, and what I have observed of you in the past as well that seems to fit the idea of a Ti type much better than it does Ni.


----------



## liminalthought

ephemereality said:


> @_liminalthought_, I think you take that description of Ni a bit too literally. Does Ni result in imaginary? Yes, but it doesn't have to be actual mental images that you visually see in your mind like visual thinking. The imaginary of Ni can also be in the form of very strong impressions of something being meaningful because the impressions are of archetypal character. By imaginary, it relates to imagination, not images. This is because Jung actually described intuition this way.
> 
> So if your conclusions are true, then every visual thinker is an Ni type and I don't think that's very true, since you could equally argue that all Se types should be visual thinkers being so focused on the environment.


images, imaginations, insights, inert experience, what have you? It's an adaptation. You complicate what is simple (though you would probably say the same about me in reverse order)

"_*so the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious, without establishing any connection between the phenomenon and himself*._ Just as the world can never become a moral problem for the man who merely senses it, so the world of images is never a moral problem to the intuitive."

image to to image, insight to insight, vision to vision, memory to memory, intuition to intuition, perception to perception, it doesn't matter. 

"It sees the image of a tottering man pierced through the heart by an arrow. This *image* fascinates the intuitive activity; it is arrested by it, and seeks to explore every detail of it. It holds fast to the *vision*, observing with the liveliest interest how the picture changes, unfolds further, and finally fades. In this way introverted intuition *perceives* all the background processes of consciousness with almost the same distinctness as extraverted sensation senses outer objects. For intuition, therefore, the *unconscious images* attain to the dignity of things or objects. But, because *intuition* excludes the co-operation of sensation, it obtains either no knowledge at all or at the best a very inadequate awareness of the innervation-disturbances or of the physical effects produced by the *unconscious* *images*. Accordingly, the *images* appear as though detached from the subject, as though existing in themselves without relation to the person."


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> But if you're an introverted type you'd easily shut that out no? Maybe I'm wrong about that...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explain a bit more?


Introverts mentally react more strongly to external stimuli. I remember reading through some study, and it showed that when there's not much going on in the environment, introverts have a lot more brain activity than extroverts. Then, when there's a lot of stuff going on in the environment, the brains of introverts just complete light up like a Christmas tree whereas extroverts aren't as nearly overwhelmed.


----------



## Entropic

liminalthought said:


> images, imaginations, insights, inert experience, what have you? It's an adaptation. You complicate what is simple (though you would probably say the same about me in reverse order)
> 
> "_*so the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious, without establishing any connection between the phenomenon and himself*._ Just as the world can never become a moral problem for the man who merely senses it, so the world of images is never a moral problem to the intuitive."
> 
> image to to image, insight to insight, vision to vision, memory to memory, intuition to intuition, perception to perception, it doesn't matter.
> 
> "It sees the image of a tottering man pierced through the heart by an arrow. This *image* fascinates the intuitive activity; it is arrested by it, and seeks to explore every detail of it. It holds fast to the *vision*, observing with the liveliest interest how the picture changes, unfolds further, and finally fades. In this way introverted intuition *perceives* all the background processes of consciousness with almost the same distinctness as extraverted sensation senses outer objects. For intuition, therefore, the *unconscious images* attain to the dignity of things or objects. But, because *intuition* excludes the co-operation of sensation, it obtains either no knowledge at all or at the best a very inadequate awareness of the innervation-disturbances or of the physical effects produced by the *unconscious* *images*. Accordingly, the *images* appear as though detached from the subject, as though existing in themselves without relation to the person."


Why citing Jung now?

Regardless, if you go by Jung's definition of intuition, it again has nothing to with visual thinking which is the original claim you seem to make.


----------



## liminalthought

ephemereality said:


> It actually seems much closer to this:
> 
> 
> 
> You are forcing data to fit into an idea of how the world should be, because it fits your logical model. You aren't describing cause and effect between events, ideas, or objects, but you are simply trying to pigeonhole how you think Ni types have to be visual thinkers that likely coincides because you identify yourself as a visual thinker. So you therefore draw the logical conclusion that since you yourself as a visual thinker and you identify as an Ni type, and you can even find some weak claims in the Ni description that Ni type thinks in images, it just further reinforces your idea that you are an Ni type and what Ni types are supposed to be. You are basing type on your own thinking which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but that assumes you have properly identified your thinking and understand how it operates.


 What logical model? I'm only trying to demonstrate the connections I see. The theory itself is the logical model, for me to observe independently.

I'm not saying what Ni types should be. You're taking certain attributes of Ni too literally while ignoring what it really alludes to. What I see is that you're trying to construct Ni for yourself, but you can't construct it. It's only a form of seeing things, unfounded by any kind of structure. The kind of structure you're trying to apply.


----------



## Entropic

liminalthought said:


> What logical model? I'm only trying to demonstrate the connections I see. The theory itself is the logical model, for me to observe independently.


Yes, but the way you apply it always seems to be to fit a certain idea of what you think something is. 


> I'm not saying what Ni types should be. You're taking certain attributes of Ni too literally while ignoring what it really alludes to.


What attributes am I taking to literally?



> What I see is that you're trying to construct Ni for yourself, but you can't construct it.


And how am I constructing Ni for myself? Also, all theory deals with some kind of categorical construction. If one is going to discuss theory, this is unavoidable.


> It's only a form of seeing things, unfounded by any kind of structure. The kind of structure you're trying to apply.[


What structure? I never made any inference to any structure in my post.


----------



## liminalthought

ephemereality said:


> Yes, but the way you apply it always seems to be to fit a certain idea of what you think something is.
> 
> 
> What attributes am I taking to literally?
> 
> 
> And how am I constructing Ni for myself? Also, all theory deals with some kind of categorical construction. If one is going to discuss theory, this is unavoidable.
> 
> What structure? I never made any inference to any structure in my post.


Pediction: our arguments will begin to take on the usual circular form without progress, as always.
Therefore: I will end this debate here.


----------



## itsme45

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Introverts mentally react more strongly to external stimuli. I remember reading through some study, and it showed that when there's not much going on in the environment, introverts have a lot more brain activity than extroverts. Then, when there's a lot of stuff going on in the environment, the brains of introverts just complete light up like a Christmas tree whereas extroverts aren't as nearly overwhelmed.


I don't think this has to be relevant to the simple fact of paying attention to external stimuli instead of internal logical reasoning. You pay attention, that doesn't say anything about how strongly you react mentally. You could just be simply more focused on the external stuff. Which would make you an extravert  But yeah if you feel like it's overload for you then you'd be more of an introvert. That's not what I experience. For me it's just more focus outside so less time with focus on thoughts to explain in an IRL discussion. And I thought that introverts just don't really pay attention to the external stimuli much (to avoid overload, to avoid getting drained). 




ephemereality said:


> Also, when I talk I can auto-correct myself and go back and explain something I missed and people can still follow. More difficult in text. That's what I mean that text requires a different structure, though apparently, I still tend to give people a headache when I am explaining as to why that happened and led to this thing and eventually no one can follow it anymore lol.


Ok but in text you can do this correcting before showing the text to the discussion partner. That's what helps for me 




> I wonder if it's common for Ti types to think this way in general.


Ask other Ti types. 




> Interesting. What images did you experience if you got an example?


I'll see if I can remember specific ones...




> Yes, I do think the super-id block is painted in a more positive light in that they don't incorporate Jung's idea of how it relates to complexes, though on the other hand, I can see why the super-id could still be seen in a negative light in _oneself_ though not necessarily _in others_, experiencing a compensatory effect. If we did not experience some kind of negativity around our super-id at all, then why don't we just go ahead and utilize those functions?


Makes sense 




liminalthought said:


> Let's not resort to Jung, this isn't the cognitive functions forum. It will be more difficult if we mix theories.


Then why do you mention Jung yourself later when talking about Ni imagery?  Anyway I mentioned it as it's all different theories about the same subject. It's not about mixing, it's about showing the answer to the question isn't that simple. Not a simple "yes" for sure. (Question here being the truth of the statement that rational functions: verbal, irrational functions: imagery.)




> Just for the record, images/imaginations are involved:
> 
> It seems that Ti users hold a certain image in place (as opposed to just having visions), wishing to justify and shape it with their own logic


Yeah exactly, it can be an explicit mental image and even when not, it's usually wordless for me. Not verbal.




> "For, as in the former case the purely empirical heaping together of facts paralyses thought and smothers their meaning, so in the latter case introverted thinking* shows a dangerous tendency [p. 482] to coerce facts into the shape of its image, or by ignoring them altogether, to unfold its phantasy image in freedom*."
> 
> This is may also explain why Ti users are so allergic to facts (Te), as the article mentions.


Yeah well, Ti-doms I guess are like that. I'm not allergic to facts but it's true that facts on their own are often meaningless.




> Socionics takes it a step further _*into the life* of the person_


Yeah well, wish I was as organized as a LxI 




> This whole post is me doing this:
> 
> "Ni is generally associated with the ability to recognize the unfolding of processes over time (how one event leads to another), have visions of the past and future, develop mental imagery, and *see intangible hints of relationships between processes or objects*." (From the Ni reference before)


I didn't really notice that, just fact listing and a bit of conclusions but that's my perspective. Guess the Ni is a more invisible thing by default.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

itsme45 said:


> I don't think this has to be relevant to the simple fact of paying attention to external stimuli instead of internal logical reasoning. You pay attention, that doesn't say anything about how strongly you react mentally. You could just be simply more focused on the external stuff. Which would make you an extravert  But yeah if you feel like it's overload for you then you'd be more of an introvert. That's not what I experience. For me it's just more focus outside so less time with focus on thoughts to explain in an IRL discussion. And I thought that introverts just don't really pay attention to the external stimuli much (to avoid overload, to avoid getting drained).


The psychological experience of it is hard to articulate. Even more so to a person who has never experienced it before (an extrovert). Like trying to explain colors to a blind person.


----------



## liminalthought

itsme45 said:


> I didn't really notice that, just fact listing and a bit of conclusions but that's my perspective. Guess the Ni is a more invisible thing by default.


This is how the Se-Ni dynamic works. Focus on tangible experience (Se) as opposed to intangible experience (Ni).


----------



## itsme45

liminalthought said:


> This is how the Se-Ni dynamic works. Focus on tangible experience (Se) as opposed to intangible experience (Ni).


Yeah I do see myself in that


----------



## cyamitide

good morning Alphas
@GreenCoyote was wondering how much do you relate to Stratievskaya's depiction of alpha relationships -- do you think she is accurate in her portrayals of alpha intertypes? this is the link: Socionics - the16types.info - Intertype Relations


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

I think the entire theory of intertype relations in socionics is very flawed. ^.^


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I think the entire theory of intertype relations in socionics is very flawed. ^.^


I think I can agree with you here. It places too much emphasis on the shortcomings of non-dual relationships in comparison to duality rather than observing interplay between certain types and making observations independent of the standards held for dual relationships. I also don't think duals in conflict with one another is hashed out enough. The notion of duality also implies that all people want smooth relationships where partners compensate for areas they want to be proficient in but are lacking in.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


> I think I can agree with you here. It places too much emphasis on the shortcomings of non-dual relationships in comparison to duality rather than observing interplay between certain types and making observations independent of the standards held for dual relationships. I also don't think duals in conflict with one another is hashed out enough. The notion of duality also implies that all people want smooth relationships where partners compensate for areas they want to be proficient in but are lacking in.


My Kindred is backing me up.

Wink, wink.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> My Kindred is backing me up.
> 
> Wink, wink.


Glad to be at your service.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


> Glad to be at your service.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


>


----------



## itsme45

Ananael said:


> I also don't think duals in conflict with one another is hashed out enough.


oh yeah I'd like to read more about that!


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


>


For some reason this reminded me of this


----------



## cyamitide

Stalin vs Hitler, one of the most famous dual conflicts in history.



itsme45 said:


> oh yeah I'd like to read more about that!


apparently it turns into a world war


----------



## Helios

cyamitide said:


> Stalin vs Hitler, one of the most famous dual conflicts in history.
> 
> 
> apparently it turns into a world war


What were their respective types?
Can we have more dual conflicts like this please?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

cyamitide said:


> Stalin vs Hitler, one of the most famous dual conflicts in history.
> 
> 
> apparently it turns into a world war


Only in the Beta quadra.


----------



## Diphenhydramine

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Interesting point, I've heard that Hitler didn't have a concrete structure and instead most people had to vy for command and praise. Sounds more Beta than Gamma I suppose.


 Yes, this is basically true - people view Nazi Germany as a very organised society, but it really wasn't - at the highest echelons of power people constantly fought for Hitler's favour (as you alluded to) and if they got it, then their word passed down to their department was "Fuhrerprinzip," essentially the idea that anything done under the Fuhrers name was legitimate. Hitler was never a competent micromanager - in fact, he was never even a manager: one great contribution to this abundantly bad warmaking capacity was his total inability to manage anything although he would himself micromanage offensives down to the brigade-regiment level.

Churchill, btw, another beta, had a similar problem: and he too was beset by depressive periods. Churchill and Hitler are actually remarkably similar: both saw themselves as having a historical purpose, put on the earth to achieve: Churchill to save the British Empire from grave peril and Hitler to establish the German reich: ironically they both failed, only Hitler failed more. Both were incredibly charismatic and could be incredibly harsh in an aristocratic way: for Adolf this needs no explaining but Churchill, well, look up his views on the colonies, especially how he dealt with Iraq. 

They were both military micromanagers. There were reasons of military history and science that I won't go into as to why Hitlers micromanagement was worse. Add Stalin, another beta, into the equation and it becomes more and more interesting: Stalin DID micromanage, but not on a military scale, because he had beta and gamma generals who wouldn't be bossed around (The Russians always quote Zhukov as standing up to Stalin: "If you believe that the Head of the Chief Headquarters is capable only of talking gibberish, then he has no reason to be here. I ask you to relieve me of my rank as the Head of the Chief Headquarters and to send me to the front." This quote appears in all Russian SLE translated typings.

And Stalin had frightening method of micromanagement: he called a number of managers of aircraft production plants and said directly to them: "They [Ilyushin Il-2 aircraft] are as essential to the Red Army as air and bread. I demand more machines. This is my final warning!" Do you get much more beta than that?

On the contrary, the British and German militaries lacked betas, because they were fundamentally very rigid organisations (the British being based on the public school system, at least in WWII for General officers, and the German even more so with the Junkers military class) - Stalin killed any general who stank of stagnant aristocracy, (including Tukhachevsky, to my mind the most brilliant Russian military thinker, and the man in my avatar - a gamma SEE, apparently) and those who rose to the top in the Soviet system were the betas: Soviet generals were disproportionately beta, I think Konev too - and definitely Beria. So there was a core of people, by 1941, who Stalin basically couldn't micromanage. He was also probably basically more intelligent than Churchill and Hitler and realised that his early micromanagements were failures. It took a beta SLE to perusade him to lay off. 

Ah sorry, what a rant.


----------



## Entropic

Diphenhydramine said:


> Yes, this is basically true - people view Nazi Germany as a very organised society, but it really wasn't - at the highest echelons of power people constantly fought for Hitler's favour (as you alluded to) and if they got it, then their word passed down to their department was "Fuhrerprinzip," essentially the idea that anything done under the Fuhrers name was legitimate. Hitler was never a competent micromanager - in fact, he was never even a manager: one great contribution to this abundantly bad warmaking capacity was his total inability to manage anything although he would himself micromanage offensives down to the brigade-regiment level.
> 
> Churchill, btw, another beta, had a similar problem: and he too was beset by depressive periods. Churchill and Hitler are actually remarkably similar: both saw themselves as having a historical purpose, put on the earth to achieve: Churchill to save the British Empire from grave peril and Hitler to establish the German reich: ironically they both failed, only Hitler failed more. Both were incredibly charismatic and could be incredibly harsh in an aristocratic way: for Adolf this needs no explaining but Churchill, well, look up his views on the colonies, especially how he dealt with Iraq.
> 
> They were both military micromanagers. There were reasons of military history and science that I won't go into as to why Hitlers micromanagement was worse. Add Stalin, another beta, into the equation and it becomes more and more interesting: Stalin DID micromanage, but not on a military scale, because he had beta and gamma generals who wouldn't be bossed around (The Russians always quote Zhukov as standing up to Stalin: "If you believe that the Head of the Chief Headquarters is capable only of talking gibberish, then he has no reason to be here. I ask you to relieve me of my rank as the Head of the Chief Headquarters and to send me to the front." This quote appears in all Russian SLE translated typings.
> 
> And Stalin had frightening method of micromanagement: he called a number of managers of aircraft production plants and said directly to them: "They [Ilyushin Il-2 aircraft] are as essential to the Red Army as air and bread. I demand more machines. This is my final warning!" Do you get much more beta than that?
> 
> On the contrary, the British and German militaries lacked betas, because they were fundamentally very rigid organisations (the British being based on the public school system, at least in WWII for General officers, and the German even more so with the Junkers military class) - Stalin killed any general who stank of stagnant aristocracy, (including Tukhachevsky, to my mind the most brilliant Russian military thinker, and the man in my avatar - a gamma SEE, apparently) and those who rose to the top in the Soviet system were the betas: Soviet generals were disproportionately beta, I think Konev too - and definitely Beria. So there was a core of people, by 1941, who Stalin basically couldn't micromanage. He was also probably basically more intelligent than Churchill and Hitler and realised that his early micromanagements were failures. It took a beta SLE to perusade him to lay off.
> 
> Ah sorry, what a rant.


No, this was very interesting to read though I have little insight in history and never have I had such interest so typing historical people has not been my cup of tea; but it's interesting from a macro-political point of view and one can see how conflict occurs simply because of different beta values of what groups are valuable.

What I find is usually important to beta aristocracy is this sense of "my people", and if this idea of "people" is not extended beyond a certain social/whathaveyou clique, there will obviously be social conflicts occurring. This is seemingly not a problem for gamma for example, despite one would think that Fi harsh judgement would lead to the "my people" attitude more than Fe. Instead though, because of democratic values everyone is included. 

That's why I think Code Geass is a good and interesting anime from a quadra POV because it's such an obvious clash between beta vs gamma values.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

What would a country of ENTp/ISFps look like? I'd imagine it would be a combination of aesthetics and cutting-edge technology and innovation. Probably not very productive in the common sense, but very focused on new experiences. Like Japan? Maybe not... New Zealand?


----------



## Kanerou

Diphenhydramine said:


> Ah sorry, what a rant.


Nah. It was actually quite interesting.


----------



## Entropic

Tainted Streetlight said:


> What would a country of ENTp/ISFps look like? I'd imagine it would be a combination of aesthetics and cutting-edge technology and innovation. Probably not very productive in the common sense, but very focused on new experiences. Like Japan? Maybe not... New Zealand?


Wouldn't a country such as India be a decent example if one disregards the caste system at least (that one seems quite aristocratic)? I think Japan is more delta with such a focus on production and technology. I don't have enough understanding of how New Zealanders are like so I can't comment.


----------



## Daylily

Hi! I'm trying to figure out this socioncs stuff. I typed ESE, so I guess this is the place for me. So far the only reference I've seen to an ESE was someone's mother. As a mother myself, I'm interested in how your relationship is with your mom! I'm always trying to figure out how NOT to mess up my kids!


----------



## zinnia

Daylily said:


> Hi! I'm trying to figure out this socioncs stuff. I typed ESE, so I guess this is the place for me. So far the only reference I've seen to an ESE was someone's mother. As a mother myself, I'm interested in how your relationship is with your mom! I'm always trying to figure out how NOT to mess up my kids!


If you are truly ESE then yep, this is the place for you. Hi!

Yeah, people very commonly type their mothers as ESE's and ESFJ's in MBTI... which is rather annoying, because it means many of them are not looking past stereotypes. Oh well.  (I always feel like asking if they knew what their mom was like when she was younger before taking on the role of motherhood... but the answer is obviously no and the point of the question may be lost on them.)

About parenting strategies... Maybe this sounds overly idealistic but I think one of the most important things a parent can do for their kids' self-esteem is that it's okay to be yourself and that you'll be loved no matter what (unless he/she becomes a serial killer, then... hm). I see a lot of kids (and adults) with issues related to self-esteem and it seems to me a lot of that stems from unfair expectations made by parents, teachers, etc. as they were growing up. I was lucky to have been raised that way even when extended family (uncles, aunts, grandparents) kept telling my parents there was something wrong with me. Anyway, sorry for the blabbing. Welcome


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

ephemereality said:


> Wouldn't a country such as India be a decent example if one disregards the caste system at least (that one seems quite aristocratic)? I think Japan is more delta with such a focus on production and technology. I don't have enough understanding of how New Zealanders are like so I can't comment.


I think I would agree with you about Japan, but why India? The only thing I think of when I think of India is xSxPs, but nothing more specific, and I doubt that's even very true.


----------



## Entropic

Tainted Streetlight said:


> I think I would agree with you about Japan, but why India? The only thing I think of when I think of India is xSxPs, but nothing more specific, and I doubt that's even very true.


India and this entire area of South-West Asia is known for its leisure-like culture (devalued production), its rich history, art and religion in combination with a strong desire to innovate, hence the current development occurring. India has for example produced its own movie genre, Bollywood films, that mostly seem to focus on somewhat quirky love stories told from the point of view of music and dancing. At the same time India is extremely diverse culturally and socially, and while one could argue that from various perspectives from a more generalized and stereotype point of view, I see uniting such differences more in the lines of democracy than it is aristocracy. 

Another aspect of India and the Indian people is how they are moving and innovating other parts of the world. Take a city such as Dubai where over 50% of the population are Indians. It's Ne opportunism the way I see it.

In addition, I think that Hinduism is a very Ne-like religion as well.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Daylily said:


> I'm always trying to figure out how NOT to mess up my kids!


Don't become a drug addict, see your child past the age of 2 and don't OD when they're 11.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Don't become a drug addict, see your child past the age of 2 and don't OD when they're 11.


I'm on that good kush and alcohol?

Kidding about the weed. I'm more of a drinker anyway.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


> I'm on that good kush and alcohol?
> 
> Kidding about the weed. I'm more of a drinker anyway.


I'm much more interested in weed, which unfortunately has worse consequences. It's very calming and comfortable. Alcohol tastes bad, sometimes hard to swallow and causes hangovers.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I'm much more interested in weed, which unfortunately has worse consequences. It's very calming and comfortable. Alcohol tastes bad, sometimes hard to swallow and causes hangovers.


If you're smart about drinking when you do it, hangovers can be avoided. And at some point I'll probably try weed. I just need a friend with a vape and a good strain.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


> If you're smart about drinking when you do it, hangovers can be avoided. And at some point I'll probably try weed. I just need a friend with a vape and a good strain.


I also rarely drink in silent protest of some people not being able to socialize in a large group without drinking. 

Pot has also energized me for like 12+ hours straight with no sleep (plus 12 hours prior to smoking it), after the crash. Which was very odd and troubling, because I tend to have a low energy level.


----------



## Helios

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I also rarely drink in silent protest of some people not being able to socialize in a large group without drinking.


I find it easier to drink in smaller groups rather than larger groups. For those I prefer to be sober. 



> Pot has also energized me for like 12+ hours straight with no sleep (plus 12 hours prior to smoking it), after the crash. Which was very odd and troubling, because I tend to have a low energy level.


Haha, someone recommended it to me for relaxive and meditative purposes.


----------



## LibertyPrime

Happy Halloween guys (in advance)


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Ananael said:


> Haha, someone recommended it to me for relaxive and meditative purposes.


It is very good for that until the high wears off and you crash. Then, for me at least, I'm energized for 12+ hours. It's very weird.


----------



## LibertyPrime

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Don't become a drug addict, see your child past the age of 2 and don't OD when they're 11.


How is this related to @Daylily's post? I fail to see the connection as anything other then a random possibility, unless there is a dug related issue here that I'm not aware of on her side.


----------



## zinnia

FreeBeer said:


> How is this related to _Daylily_'s post? I fail to see the connection as anything other then a random possibility, unless there is a dug related issue here that I'm not aware of on her side.


Well, she asked how not to mess up her kids, right? I took it as a bit of a sarcastic joke. It is certainly one way considering how children of drug addicts have a crapton of issues growing up, though I don't think it was quite what she was asking for... (btw, I know you weren't asking my opinion but I am bored and ate too much sugar. woo spamming posts )



> I'm always trying to figure out how NOT to mess up my kids!


----------



## Daylily

zinnia said:


> If you are truly ESE then yep, this is the place for you. Hi!
> 
> Yeah, people very commonly type their mothers as ESE's and ESFJ's in MBTI... which is rather annoying, because it means many of them are not looking past stereotypes. Oh well.  (I always feel like asking if they knew what their mom was like when she was younger before taking on the role of motherhood... but the answer is obviously no and the point of the question may be lost on them.)
> 
> About parenting strategies... Maybe this sounds overly idealistic but I think one of the most important things a parent can do for their kids' self-esteem is that it's okay to be yourself and that you'll be loved no matter what (unless he/she becomes a serial killer, then... hm). I see a lot of kids (and adults) with issues related to self-esteem and it seems to me a lot of that stems from unfair expectations made by parents, teachers, etc. as they were growing up. I was lucky to have been raised that way even when extended family (uncles, aunts, grandparents) kept telling my parents there was something wrong with me. Anyway, sorry for the blabbing. Welcome


Thanks! I'm not 100% sure on the ESE as I'm new to socionics, but it seems to fit. I agree with your advice and do my best to love my kids unconditionally. I'm learning a bunch about emotional intellegence and how to teach it to our children. I'm also a teacher so this kind of thing is generally interesting to me. I'm interested in why people have such a negative view of their mothers- and why they seem to think they are all ESFJ ESE's?


And no worries- no drug problems here!


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

Hmm I haven't watched Friends in ages but couldn't she be an ENFp? Why is she Fe-dom? Also, it seems to me EJs fit better to the choleric temperament.

Now that I think about it, there's a woman in the choir I go to who's got a very similar personality and demeanor to her. Probably a similar type.


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> I wanna play a game!


Absolutely! It's my birthday, wish you were here so we could feed you in person.

Name the game .... or u wanna brainstorm it first :tongue:


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> Absolutely! It's my birthday, wish you were here so we could feed you in person.


Are you 2014? It's an honor to meet you. I hope you like me more than 2013. I swear I'm awesome.



> Name the game .... or u wanna brainstorm it first :tongue:


It's very simple. I ask a question. You answer it. And then you ask a question. Answers are not required to be truthful, logical, or in English. 

First Q: Does your avatar ever get tired of bouncing and go on strike?


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> Are you 2014? It's an honor to meet you. I hope you like me more than 2013. I swear I'm awesome.
> 
> 
> 
> It's very simple. I ask a question. You answer it. And then you ask a question. Answers are not required to be truthful, logical, or in English.
> 
> First Q: Does your avatar ever get tired of bouncing and go on strike?


ok I'm also cooking, so be patient :tongue:


Monkey stops bouncing after a few minutes.



Are you Italian?


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> ok I'm also cooking, so be patient :tongue:
> 
> 
> Monkey stops bouncing after a few minutes.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you Italian?


Eh, think less Mussolini, more Stalin.

Do you have any advice for a young super-villain interested in world domination?


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> Eh, think less Mussolini, more Stalin.
> 
> Do you have any advice for a young super-villain interested in world domination?


Roooskie!

First practice flapping your wings until you can fly.

What are u gonna do once you are Master/Mistress of the world?


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> Roooskie!
> 
> First practice flapping your wings until you can fly.
> 
> What are u gonna do once you are Master/Mistress of the world?


Get all the greatest minds together and engineer a way to make live fish come out of electric sockets at my command.

How do you feel about toothpicks?


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> Get all the greatest minds together and engineer a way to make live fish come out of electric sockets at my command.
> 
> How do you feel about toothpicks?


I don't use them.

Guess what I got for birthday yesterday?


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> I don't use them.
> 
> Guess what I got for birthday yesterday?


A toothpick? Although technically that's an instruction, not a question.

What is the federal punishment for unnecessary grammar pedantry?


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> A toothpick? Although technically that's an instruction, not a question.
> 
> What is the federal punishment for unnecessary grammar pedantry?


Federal? What country are you referring to?


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> Federal? What country are you referring to?


Hmmm....Australia? Maybe Lebanon. I woke up in this hot, windowless room, so I'm not entirely certain.


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> Hmmm....Australia? Maybe Lebanon. I woke up in this hot, windowless room, so I'm not entirely certain.


omg you've been taken hostage! Did they hurt you? I'll come and save you.:sad:


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> omg you've been taken hostage! Did they hurt you? I'll come and save you.:sad:


How do I figure out where I am? And no, they haven't hurt me, but they've been feeding me nothing but Lunchables....


----------



## yentipeee

randomshoes said:


> How do I figure out where I am? And no, they haven't hurt me, but they've been feeding me nothing but Lunchables....


Turn on GPS & Location Service on your iPad, and send me your #:tongue:


----------



## randomshoes

yentipeee said:


> Turn on GPS & Location Service on your iPad, and send me your #:tongue:


I don't have one of those. I have a phone, but its number is in binary: 1-(0111001)-101011111-0001100101011101.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

randomshoes said:


> I don't have one of those. I have a phone, but its number is in binary: 1-(0111001)-101011111-0001100101011101.


You have a two digit area code in decimal...

liez


----------



## yentipeee

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> You have a two digit area code in decimal...
> 
> liez


girls don't need 3 digits, 1 or 2 is fine


----------



## randomshoes

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> You have a two digit area code in decimal...
> 
> liez


1-(01 11 001)-101011111-0001100101011101.


----------



## Word Dispenser

randomshoes said:


> Hmmm....Australia? Maybe Lebanon. I woke up in this hot, windowless room, so I'm not entirely certain.


It depends-- Top level or bottom level? What's it smell like? What do you remember before you woke up? Did you dream anything? Were you sleeping in a nice comfy bed, or some type of makeshift sleeping accomodation? Are you surrounded by bugs? Are you a stock investor?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

randomshoes said:


> 1-(01 11 001)-101011111-0001100101011101.


That's better.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

To the alphas... do you ever feel that there are not many of us who make it to socionics? I feel like the majority of people in this forum are ILI. Which, for me, is quite unhelpful, because they don't play nice with us ILEs.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Tainted Streetlight said:


> To the alphas... do you ever feel that there are not many of us who make it to socionics? I feel like the majority of people in this forum are ILI. Which, for me, is quite unhelpful, because they don't play nice with us ILEs.


The Alpha population on the16types is actually higher than Gamma I think.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> The Alpha population on the16types is actually higher than Gamma I think.


If I remember right, the Gamma-subforum is the least active over there. So they're sort of the opposite of us. (There probably are some mistyped people in both places though.)


----------



## bearotter

I don't know, I'm _really _not great at gauging this sort of thing, but... is the socionics forum really active enough nowadays to begin with? I got the idea that it used to be more so somehow before.

I don't know that I see a tremendous number of delta's either? I see a fair number of gamma's, some beta's, maybe somewhat fewer alpha's, and idk, I really haven't noticed many delta posters. Shrugs.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

bearotter said:


> I don't know, I'm _really _not great at gauging this sort of thing, but... is the socionics forum really active enough nowadays to begin with? I got the idea that it used to be more so somehow before.


From what I've seen, it's height was about 4-6 months ago. And that wasn't a huge difference from now.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> The Alpha population on the16types is actually higher than Gamma I think.


I've almost joined that site a number of times, but never gotten around to it. The thing is, the community is just so much larger here, I feel like anything quasi-scientific I post has more impact here than there. But I've read enough of their posts to justify joining 16types


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

@_bearotter_

what is your type? I've always confused you for that ENTP that has a cartoon otter for her signature


----------



## bearotter

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> From what I've seen, it's height was about 4-6 months ago. And that wasn't a huge difference from now.​




OK fair enough. I kind of missed most of the era of aestrivex and the like. Actually I was never super active on the socionics forum, so I guess it's just vague impression.
​


----------



## d e c a d e n t

I signed up there. Not sure what I expected to come from that, but I figured it could be interesting. I am somewhat amused by the trollish nature of that forum, at least.


----------



## zinnia

Nonsense said:


> I signed up there. Not sure what I expected to come from that, but I figured it could be interesting. I am somewhat amused by the trollish nature of that forum, at least.


Oyy, I wanted to make an account there because sometimes there's pretty interesting discussions but I couldn't deal with that "trollish nature." Too much crap to have to get through to get to the good stuff. :'(

Though I guess it sort of is amusing, sometimes... at least as a bystander P:


----------



## d e c a d e n t

zinnia said:


> Oyy, I wanted to make an account there because sometimes there's pretty interesting discussions but I couldn't deal with that "trollish nature." Too much crap to have to get through to get to the good stuff. :'(
> 
> Though I guess it sort of is amusing, sometimes... at least as a bystander P:


Some of the discussions there can be interesting, and I've looked at their threads on the various function because it's interesting to see stories of how they can manifest in actual people instead of just reading type descriptions (though some of it doesn't seem that useful, like someone described Se-PoLR as being unaware if someone's interested in you because you can't pay attention to your surroundings etc). 

I don't know what it says about me that the trollish nature was part of the appeal. >_>


----------



## bearotter

@_Tainted Streetlight_ -- I have a hard time with socionics perceiving functions, as well as the static/dynamic concept that are really central if I'm not gonna butcher the system when answering. I can say I know my inner processes much more clearly than I understand why the rules of socionics are all as they are. I'm attempting to build socionics in my head in a way that makes sense to me nowadays. I fall heavily on the Ti over the Te end of the spectrum, and have pretty clear problems around socionics-Se. 


What ENTP?


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

bearotter said:


> @_Tainted Streetlight_ -- I have a hard time with socionics perceiving functions, as well as the static/dynamic concept that are really central if I'm not gonna butcher the system when answering. I can say I know my inner processes much more clearly than I understand why the rules of socionics are all as they are. I'm attempting to build socionics in my head in a way that makes sense to me nowadays. I fall heavily on the Ti over the Te end of the spectrum, and have pretty clear problems around socionics-Se.
> 
> 
> What ENTP?


Monte. Name just came to me. 

I feel like I only briefly foray into the very deep end of socionic theory. I had read the article on static vs dynamic, but reading it again made me realize that I hadn't absorbed all the information. But it's good that you are being careful. Still, I've seen it as a trend that a large percentage of the people here don't know what type they are, which is a bit upsetting, because that means that socionics is too confusing for a lot of people to understand it.

Do you have any questions? I could try to help you based off of my knowledge of socionics.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

I got to admit, I'm still having some trouble understanding the static/dynamic concept as well. :/


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

@_Nonsense_ @_bearotter_


From what I understand:

In my mind, the names of the dichotomies should be switched. To me, static people live a more localized, episodic type of life. For us Alphas, its in terms of emotional stability. The T types in our quadra lack ethical (relationship) consistency. ENTps struggle rather with sticking to any one thing, be them people, or careers, or whatever. From what I've seen with INTjs, even the healthier (might not be true?) of them struggle to maintain healthy relationship distance with people. I've known one to cheat somewhat, and another who jumped way too quickly into sexual relations.

Our duals are dynamic because they seem to move slowly. They don't change their minds on ethical things readily. In relationships, they are much more likely to stick to an idea or person for a longer period of time.

Superficially, the difference between the two resembles the destinction between the MBTI J/P dichotomy, but it's quite a bit more in depth than that. I don't know why, but the logical alphas can view the long-term things in their lives as permanent, and be more concerned with improving the shorter term.

This is my take on that dichotomy.


Primary source material
+ life experience


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Tainted Streetlight said:


> I've almost joined that site a number of times, but never gotten around to it. The thing is, the community is just so much larger here, I feel like anything quasi-scientific I post has more impact here than there. But I've read enough of their posts to justify joining 16types


It doesn't seem very active to me.


----------



## bearotter

@_Tainted Streetlight_ - so yes, you could help, and here's part of where my struggle is.

I see the model A as having two components -- the IE 1-4 and 5-8. For sake of terminology, I'll just call "functions" the usual feeling, thinking, sensing, and intuition. So essentially 1-4 represents the functions, in the preferred form of assembling reality mentally for the type, and communicating information about it and all, _either_ static or dynamic.

What appears confusing is where the descriptions of how statics proceed on a social sphere for instance vs how dynamics do so is influenced by the fact that their 5-8 are all opposite to their preference in this dichotomy. 
These have their role in information metabolism, too. 



> Dynamics focus on movements and interactions of things. This is a general characteristic, however, and a person will display static or dynamic perception at any given moment depending on which IM element is in use.


would appear to suggest to me that the cognition demonstrated by a user and the way the user is actually assembling info in the mind may exhibit some kind of disconnect with each other!


Basically I'd like to get a much clearer idea of what actually is meant by the idea of 1-4 being the same within the chosen end of the dichotomy. Using Freud's terminology of ego/superego, it appears 3-4 are essentially the parallel to 1-2 in the realm of the nonpreferred functions, and theoretically could provide an alternative perspective on the same events, say in a dynamic type (Si-Fe vs. Ni-Te), where one of these pairs functions as how one primarily assembles reality, and the other might function more as a 'check' and a source of frustration as to insufficiency.


----------



## Entropic

@bearotter I came across a good concept to illustrate the differences between static and dynamic in the Japanese art called ma:

Ma (negative space) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Static perception would be the space or as Gulenko notes, static types like to fill up space with objects, whereas dynamic perception would be ma, time or movement between spaces. Which is why it becomes ridiculous to speak of Si as solely present-oriented itself, also being Pi and thus perceives dynamic changes. I think socionics falsely misattributes this to Je to a degree. I'm a very clear and obvious dynamic thinker despite having weakly expressed Te, so Te cannot be the sole attribute to dynamic thinking just like Ji cannot be for static. 

I think the problem is that Je and Ji simply draw conclusions of space and time respectively, but for us to actually perceive space and time, we need perception first.


----------



## bearotter

Tainted Streetlight said:


> . For us Alphas, its in terms of emotional stability. The T types in our quadra lack ethical (relationship) consistency. ENTps struggle rather with sticking to any one thing, be them people, or careers,







wikisocion said:


> However, in the Dynamic is a process of continuous readjustment of focus and 'drift' of purposes.






wikisocion said:


> The objectives of Statics are more stable and reliable. They know what they want and are able to maintain long-term focus upon it. They arrange priorities in their life and work, with well-differentiated primary and secondary objectives that are rarely reversed




I think the difference in perspectives there is another matter of confusion. 

It would also appear to me that if there's any consistency in one's static-ness or dynamic-ness, it had best be because one assembles information via IE 1-4, and while one is well-adjusted around 1-2, not so much around 3-4, where one perhaps experiences as such a greater problem due to the static/dynamic imbalance, and thus seeks help with the functions corresponding to 3-4 through the realms of 5-6 supplied by an outside party.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Honestly, I'm more confused than when I started. Why I feel all this theory isn't necessarily helpful.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Are hook ups worth it for non-Se types?

I'm having a hard time imagining what a Ne-Si hookup would be like. Casual sharing of theoretical ideas over tasty wine?


----------



## eleventhheart

From what I understand, the ILE's dual is the SEI which approximately translates to ISFJ in MBTI. I like ISFJs fair enough, but our connection hasn't been as great as purported by the theory, and never as good as with other types. So what am I missing here?


----------



## Word Dispenser

eleventhheart said:


> From what I understand, the ILE's dual is the SEI which approximately translates to ISFJ in MBTI. I like ISFJs fair enough, but our connection hasn't been as great as purported by the theory, and never as good as with other types. So what am I missing here?


Interests.

Really, any relationship should share interests.

A person's entire personality hinges on what stokes them up.

In my current relationship, we could not be more different. We're so different, we're almost conflicting relations. It's the interests, goals, and worldview that make it work. I've grown and learned so much from him, and we become closer through our differences, even if it may seem gradual and unpredictable in nature. Anything organic usually is, and as I see it, a relationship is organic, and has substance, and grows in different directions, and requires certain sustenance.

Something that causes problems at times is differing ethical values, though, something which is just a realm where one has to negotiate compromises and try to meet in the middle. If I'm told that doing something goes too far, I back off and know not to tread in that spot again.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Are hook ups worth it for non-Se types?
> 
> I'm having a hard time imagining what a Ne-Si hookup would be like. Casual sharing of theoretical ideas over tasty wine?


What, like INFj or INTj? Depends on what they're interested in. They may not be interested in theoretical discussion, necessarily.


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> How can emotions be strange? I've never understood this.
> @_Word Dispenser_ that wasn't a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely curious, if you can explain.


I don't know. I don't understand it, myself. I can't categorize these emotions in the way I would when experiencing them in real life. They're like... Not even emotions. They're like memories of events that never took place-- Ie: The dream. But, they become something else, transforming into something beyond: Inner-sensation.

I've been terrified in a dream, running from a threat, and the feeling was nothing I've ever experienced before, or probably ever will. An amalgamation of inner-sensations that create something new.

I mean... I consider hunger to be something akin to this. Deep and not necessarily noticed until it becomes too urgent to dismiss. Although, the dream-sense-thing fades over time, rather than increases. 

Does that make more sense?


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Word Dispenser said:


> What, like INFj or INTj? Depends on what they're interested in. They may not be interested in theoretical discussion, necessarily.


No, like ENTP-ISFP.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Word Dispenser said:


> I don't know. I don't understand it, myself. I can't categorize these emotions in the way I would when experiencing them in real life. They're like... Not even emotions. They're like memories of events that never took place-- Ie: The dream. But, they become something else, transforming into something beyond: Inner-sensation.
> 
> I've been terrified in a dream, running from a threat, and the feeling was nothing I've ever experienced before, or probably ever will. An amalgamation of inner-sensations that create something new.
> 
> I mean... I consider hunger to be something akin to this. Deep and not necessarily noticed until it becomes too urgent to dismiss. Although, the dream-sense-thing fades over time, rather than increases.
> 
> Does that make more sense?


Sort of. Would you agree with me calling it a subconscious intuition?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Woah, I missed the latest attack of sniperpanda. Damn.


----------



## clay

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Are hook ups worth it for non-Se types?
> 
> I'm having a hard time imagining what a Ne-Si hookup would be like. Casual sharing of theoretical ideas over tasty wine?


I think so my Beta and Gamma friends have a much easier time than me getting chicks. A few of them have told me that I'm partially socially retarded. Although, I can speak with almost anyone well, make them laugh, and be on good rapport I fall short when it comes to romantic/sexual interest, or lack there of, it's like I'm clueless. Maybe that has more to do with Fi? Another thing is my friends tell me I'm not applying enough pressure, or I'm too much; it's like I can't tell what I'm doing even though the entire time I feel like everything is going alright. 

Ne is great to make yourself look fun, but for getting a women I don't think so. She can only laugh so long if you're not doing something that's enticing her to want you then you lost.

I'm pretty sure the combination of Se Polr, 9 type enneagram, and SX last in my instinctual stacking are definitely not helping.


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Sort of. Would you agree with me calling it a subconscious intuition?


Sure. As good a term as any. :kitteh:

I'm not sure if it intuits anything in the real world, though. Once I avoided one of my favourite professors for a week because of it. :tongue:


----------



## Empty

LII/INTj - MBTI INTP.

I've been going by MBTI function stacks mostly - Ti Ne Si Fe - and it makes a lot of sense, in theory and analysis of myself.

How does Ti Ne Fi Se compare/contrast? The descriptions of Fi Se as tertiary/inferior does not seem as applicable as Si Fe, although this could be cognitive bias.

Therefore, how should one adjust for this discrepancy between the two theories? Which one is superior, and why?


----------



## Helios

Emptiness said:


> LII/INTj - MBTI INTP.
> 
> I've been going by MBTI function stacks mostly - Ti Ne Si Fe - and it makes a lot of sense, in theory and analysis of myself.
> 
> How does Ti Ne Fi Se compare/contrast? The descriptions of Fi Se as tertiary/inferior does not seem as applicable as Si Fe, although this could be cognitive bias.
> 
> Therefore, how should one adjust for this discrepancy between the two theories? Which one is superior, and why?


Fi and Se are not your inferior in socionics, they are weak and devalued aspects of your cognition. Si and Fe are aspects of cognition that you are more receptive to, and in theory you seek out or work well with someone who leads with these two functions. 

Fi and Se are more like the aspects of the shadow as seen in MBTI. Or at least in the models that contain 8 functions.


----------



## Empty

Helios said:


> Fi and Se are not your inferior in socionics, they are weak and devalued aspects of your cognition. Si and Fe are aspects of cognition that you are more receptive to, and in theory you seek out or work well with someone who leads with these two functions.
> 
> Fi and Se are more like the aspects of the shadow as seen in MBTI. Or at least in the models that contain 8 functions.



According to my research, for the LII, Fi is the third function, Se is the fourth, Fe is the fifth, and Si is the sixth.

I am reading more about descriptions of individual functions as per socionics, in an attempt to remedy any misunderstandings I may be having.


----------



## Helios

Emptiness said:


> According to my research, for the LII, Fi is the third function, Se is the fourth, Fe is the fifth, and Si is the sixth.
> 
> I am reading more about descriptions of individual functions as per socionics, in an attempt to remedy any misunderstandings I may be having.


3rd and 4th are not really tertiary and inferior, but do read up on model A.


----------



## clay

Biebes model and Socionics model A

1-1 TI
2-2 Ne
3-6 Si
4-5 Fe
5-7 Te
6-8 Ni
7-4 Se
8-3 Fi

They put the functions in a different order than in MBTI. 

Ti and Ne you're strong in them and you value it [ego block]

Fi and Se you're weak and you don't value it [super-ego block]

Fe and Si you're weak and you value it [id block]

Te and Ni you're strong but you don't value it [super id block] 

Easy way to look at the function order.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Nobody has come to the tea party. :crying:


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Word Dispenser said:


> Nobody has come to the tea party. :crying:


For some reason I'm imagining you as the mad hatter, sitting alone.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Nonsense said:


> For some reason I'm imagining you as the mad hatter, sitting alone.


:shocked:

I'm so happy you picked up on that. :kitteh:

March Hare. MARCH HARE. Where are you?!

Sigh. He was supposed to bring the sugar cubes for the dormouse.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Word Dispenser said:


> :shocked:
> 
> I'm so happy you picked up on that. :kitteh:
> 
> March Hare. MARCH HARE. Where are you?!
> 
> Sigh. He was supposed to bring the sugar cubes for the dormouse.


Too bad. No unbirthday parties for you today.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Does anyone else really like Gulenko's writings? I seem to always find them to be very accurate. I have a strong feeling he's alpha of some sort.


----------



## Entropic

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Ok then maybe this makes more sense. My dual is the same combination to me, she's upper class, I'm middle. Maybe this should be the expected trend?


Why must there be a trend at all? I'm quite sure attraction is more complex than this.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

ephemereality said:


> Why must there be a trend at all? I'm quite sure attraction is more complex than this.


Because Ne always looks for trends and trends are how Ne users understand the world. By adding up all the trends, we result at the more complex picture.

How does Ni work?


----------



## Entropic

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Because Ne always looks for trends and trends are how Ne users understand the world. By adding up all the trends, we result at the more complex picture.
> 
> How does Ni work?


I don't think Ne must work that way either. If anything it seems like some narrow Ti (with Si) imperative to assume there is one logical true logical axiom that determines all dual relationships. I see relationships as they are and I judge each relationship on its own merit. I've read too many studies about attraction to conclude that whatever determines it; it's an incredibly complex mechanism ranging from physiological cues e.g. smell, hair color etc. to whether your partner resembles the same sex of your primary caregiver e.g. dating someone who identifies as as a woman then she is likely going to have personality traits similar to your mother and/or look like your mother. And that's just the initial attraction and it doesn't even begin to touch on whether one is compatible with said individual.


----------



## tanstaafl28

What's the topic again?


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

tanstaafl28 said:


> What's the topic again?


Dude, I don't even know haha


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Dating or something?


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

To my fellow Alphas:

What do Gamma's get out of Socionics? So much of my understanding of Socionics is linked to Ne, and I struggle to see how Socionics as an untestable system that relies so much on internal logic could be useful to Te users.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Tainted Streetlight said:


> To my fellow Alphas:
> 
> What do Gamma's get out of Socionics? So much of my understanding of Socionics is linked to Ne, and I struggle to see how Socionics as an untestable system that relies so much on internal logic could be useful to Te users.


I think it'd probably be appealing to Ni and Fi.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Word Dispenser said:


> I think it'd probably be appealing to Ni and Fi.


Hmm.... how so?


----------



## Word Dispenser

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Hmm.... how so?


Hmmmm... My logic? Fi is kinda like Ti. It's rational, and very personal, so, if strong enough... In theory, the Te will temper it just enough to support the interest in Socionics.

Then there's Ni. It's a mystery to me, but I'm guessing it would go at Socionics in a way opposite from Ne-- Meaning it would converge rather than disperse. Y'know? 

But, since all types can come to the same conclusions, using different processing, I suppose one should just consider that dynamic.


----------



## The Exception

Tainted Streetlight said:


> To my fellow Alphas:
> 
> What do Gamma's get out of Socionics? So much of my understanding of Socionics is linked to Ne, and I struggle to see how Socionics as an untestable system that relies so much on internal logic could be useful to Te users.


There are exceptions but in a general sense it seems like Gammas are most likely to be the Socionics naysayers.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Word Dispenser said:


> Then there's Ni. It's a mystery to me, but I'm guessing it would go at Socionics in a way opposite from Ne-- Meaning it would converge rather than disperse. Y'know?


Probably one of the most concise yet well thought-out explanations I've ever heard of Ni. Thanks for that!

Not as sure about the Fi, though I guess I asked the question expecting @*Fractals and Pterodactyls*​ response


----------



## Word Dispenser

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Probably one of the most concise yet well thought-out explanations I've ever heard of Ni. Thanks for that!
> 
> Not as sure about the Fi, though I guess I asked the question expecting @*Fractals and Pterodactyls*​ response


Well, somebody with Fi PoLr trying to explain how Fi-users might be attracted to Socionics is entirely infallible. :kitteh:

In any case-- I think of it like... We're all machines with different inner-parts. A tweak here, and an adjustment there, the gears turning the turbines, and you have yourself an interest. Interest can be universal across types, even if it may be a less likely result based on the size and shape of the gears. Maybe more gears need to be working, in order to justify an interest, in certain types.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

If anybody here programs or is fluent in Python, and wants to message me, that'd be dandy.


----------



## Kanerou

Tainted Streetlight said:


> To my fellow Alphas:
> 
> What do Gamma's get out of Socionics? So much of my understanding of Socionics is linked to Ne, and I struggle to see how Socionics as an untestable system that relies so much on internal logic could be useful to Te users.


I enjoy a good personality system and am not hung up over whether it's undergone testing. I get to not only classify myself but also others, and it also helps me see where others are coming from even if I disagree with what they are doing or why. I haven't applied myself as much as others, so I am still learning parts of the system; as a result, I tend to speak only on matters in which I trust my knowledge. As a whole, the theory has also taught me that it's okay to be myself and that there are people who like me in spite of, even because of, what I view as my weaknesses; that was a nice, unlooked-for bonus.


----------



## Entropic

Tainted Streetlight said:


> To my fellow Alphas:
> 
> What do Gamma's get out of Socionics? So much of my understanding of Socionics is linked with Ne, and I struggle to see how Socionics as an untestable system that relies so much on internal logic could be useful to Te users.





Word Dispenser said:


> Hmmmm... My logic? Fi is kinda like Ti. It's rational, and very personal, so, if strong enough... In theory, the Te will temper it just enough to support the interest in Socionics.
> 
> Then there's Ni. It's a mystery to me, but I'm guessing it would go at Socionics in a way opposite from Ne-- Meaning it would converge rather than disperse. Y'know?
> 
> But, since all types can come to the same conclusions, using different processing, I suppose one should just consider that dynamic.


Fi has little to do with why I like socionics as a system. It's a theory and I like theory, especially with some real world application that can explain how something works or why it is. That's if anything Se; not Fi or Ni. Any person can take an interest in something. Personal interest isn't type related. 



Fractals and Pterodactyls said:


> There are exceptions but in a general sense it seems like Gammas are most likely to be the Socionics naysayers.


Yet there are more active gammas here than alphas.

How I understand socionics is NiTe, how I apply it SeFi,why I like it has nothing to do with my type.

Seeking the tried and testable is more TeSi than it is NiTe. Most importantly it has to with keeping an open mind which is not type related.


----------



## Word Dispenser

ephemereality said:


> Fi has little to do with why I like socionics as a system. It's a theory and I like theory, especially with some real world application that can explain how something works or why it is. That's if anything Se; not Fi or Ni. Any person can take an interest in something. Personal interest isn't type related.
> 
> Yet there are more active gammas here than alphas.
> 
> How I understand socionics is NiTe, how I apply it SeFi,why I like it has nothing to do with my type.
> 
> Seeking the tried and testable is more TeSi than it is NiTe. Most importantly it has to with keeping an open mind which is not type related.


Absolutely. Interests can be identical across type. Yet, since our cognitive functions tend to be responsible for how we take in information, and our worldviews, then I can see how one type might more likely be inclined towards an interest than another. It's very important not to stereotype, though, since that tends to blind rather than illuminate. 

I think what @_Tainted Streetlight_ was getting at, though, was _how _this interest manifests. Not necessarily _why. _I wouldn't be surprised if he was just using Socionics as a singular example of interest. There are many others.

For example-- Why does the ILI, when exposed in an appropriate manner, tend to be interested in artistic drawing? :kitteh: What functions are coming into play, here? Comparably, what about the ILE? Etc.

And then, looking at each Quadra and comparing each type within, to see if there are certain obvious parallels. And then spying the lean-to interests of each, and then pondering. Exciting!


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> If anybody here programs or is fluent in Python, and wants to message me, that'd be dandy.


I'm passably terrible at Python, but am willing for entertaining public conversation. I don't make a habit of private messaging people. :laughing:


----------



## Word Dispenser

It's my birthday today! 

Party time. :kitteh:

Good food and video games, huzzah!


----------



## Elyasis

Word Dispenser said:


> It's my birthday today!
> 
> Party time. :kitteh:
> 
> Good food and video games, huzzah!


Happy Birthday!

*Don't die in a ditch.*

I gave you a thank because of your birthday. Don't spend it all in one place.


----------



## Agg Herbor

an ILE buddy and I were talking earlier about our quadra. he and I are in a band with an LII, and we were being appreciative that the writing chemistry comes so naturally between us. we all favor Ne, which keeps us from bring tied down to only one vision for the composition, keeping options as open as possible. ideas give rise to other ideas which are rarely met with contempt. I can't say for certain it's being in the same quadra that makes the writing so easy, but I could see it potentially being justified through the functions.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Okay.


When did the Delta thread get more posts than this one?


----------



## Elyasis

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Okay.
> 
> 
> When did the Delta thread get more posts than this one?


Don't worry, you're neck and neck...




_...at the bottom._


----------



## tangosthenes

hey guys... look http://personalitycafe.com/socionics-forum/221258-reflections-alpha-quadra-descriptions.html


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

High-dea of the Night: Your Benefit partner gives you an experience of their quadra.

But... Your Dual gives you an experience of every other quadra.



aaaaaannddd more importantly: Modal shift


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

I go into the Sex & Relationship forum and see this.


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I go into the Sex & Relationship forum and see this.


I'm tempted to make one called "Do Money Love Men?"


Yes, I realise that I'm giving my idea away...


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> I'm tempted to make one called "Do Money Love Men?"
> 
> 
> Yes, I realise that I'm giving my idea away...


Or rather do men love money as well?

Better yet, "Do Male Dogs Love Money?"


----------



## Maelstromeater

Professional lurker here for the jokes, the knowledge, and the chance at spotting one of the elusive unicorns (aka ESEs)


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Or rather do men love money as well?
> 
> Better yet, "Do Male Dogs Love Money?"


Ah the second one sounds good. I'm just reluctant to do it because I start thinking of all the people not getting the joke lol.


----------



## VoodooDolls

hehe i read this thread title and i swear i saw Al-Qaeda.
hehe


----------



## Maelstromeater

Dogscape – Creepypasta Wiki

Here's some food for thought related to bitches and the like, I promise it's quite the read.


----------



## wohonajax

Maelstromeater said:


> Dogscape â€“ Creepypasta Wiki
> 
> Here's some food for thought related to bitches and the like, I promise it's quite the read.


:shocked: Quite the read indeed...


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> Ah the second one sounds good. I'm just reluctant to do it because I start thinking of all the people not getting the joke lol.


Promethea wouldn't take too kindly to it either. 



Maelstromeater said:


> Dogscape â€“ Creepypasta Wiki
> 
> Here's some food for thought related to bitches and the like, I promise it's quite the read.


Last time I read a creepy pasta my boyfriend noticed I held him slightly tighter in my sleep. XD


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Promethea wouldn't take too kindly to it either.


Come on, we let someone make topics as ridiculous as those but we don't let people mock them? I know, the rules are the rules but... you know.

On a related note: I hate most of the things in the Sex & Relationships section...


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> Come on, we let someone make topics as ridiculous as those but we don't let people mock them? I know, the rules are the rules but... you know.
> 
> On a related note: I hate most of the things in the Sex & Relationships section...


Promethea talks about things as ridiculous as those topics. 

Yes, S&R, along with the Debate and Critical Thinking have a lot of "sexist," or "feminist" topics. Religion has a separate place for that now, so I guess people had to talk about some other useless, non-existent, amygdala-triggering bullshit, rather than actual issues or things that are interesting.


----------



## Word Dispenser

@ephemereality: About Stein's Gate...


* *




He ends up with the red-head... I think she's an LII. roud: 

Needs to be _some _conflict, I guess. :tongue:

I was kinda hoping he'd end up with the SEI though. But, I guess you don't see a lot of examples of proper duality in fiction, due to the lack of conflict. Especially in Anime.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Word Dispenser said:


> @_ephemereality_: About Stein's Gate...
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He ends up with the red-head... I think she's an LII. roud:
> 
> Needs to be _some _conflict, I guess. :tongue:
> 
> I was kinda hoping he'd end up with the SEI though. But, I guess you don't see a lot of examples of proper duality in fiction, due to the lack of conflict. Especially in Anime.


Why did you hope that? o:

I kind of like how it ended, lol.


----------



## Entropic

Word Dispenser said:


> @ephemereality: About Stein's Gate...
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He ends up with the red-head... I think she's an LII. roud:
> 
> Needs to be _some _conflict, I guess. :tongue:
> 
> I was kinda hoping he'd end up with the SEI though. But, I guess you don't see a lot of examples of proper duality in fiction, due to the lack of conflict. Especially in Anime.


The readhead seems Te though? Very tsundere. I don't have the anime around anymore because I accidentally deleted it on the PC some time ago.


----------



## Word Dispenser

ephemereality said:


> The readhead seems Te though? Very tsundere. I don't have the anime around anymore because I accidentally deleted it on the PC some time ago.


I dunno.






Does that show anything?

She's the one on the phone with him.

There isn't much on youtube. :kitteh:


----------



## Zima

Ahaha. I guess this group could be described as full of Alpha males and Alpha females. XD

Kind of ironic since SEIs are usually modest.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Zima said:


> Ahaha. I guess this group could be described as full of Alpha males and Alpha females. XD
> 
> Kind of ironic since SEIs are usually modest.


We're at the top of the ladder! :kitteh:


----------



## yentipeee

Word Dispenser said:


> And, are all ENTPs ILE? That depends on who you ask. But, since you're asking _me_: Yep! :kitteh:


I thought ILE is Socionics for ENTP. But in there, they include as ILEs Katharine Hepburn ENTJ, Einstein INTP and Stephen Hawking INTJ. Whereas they make it clear the ILE is a Ne-dom?


----------



## Word Dispenser

yentipeee said:


> I thought ILE is Socionics for ENTP. But in there, they include as ILEs Katharine Hepburn ENTJ, Einstein INTP and Stephen Hawking INTJ. Whereas they make it clear the ILE is a Ne-dom?


I'm not sure what you mean, but if these people are typed as 'ILE' in Socionics, then these Socionic individuals who are typing them, likely believe them to be ENTP in MBTI.

If you're saying that Einstein is listed as 'ILE and INTP', this doesn't make sense to me. But, if they say, 'Einstein is an ILE', then they're essentially saying, 'Einstein is an ENTP'.

_However... _Some people believe that MBTI and Socionics are mutually exclusive systems. Which would explain why some people might throw out two completely different types.

_I _do not think so, though.


----------



## yentipeee

Word Dispenser said:


> I'm not sure what you mean, but if these people are typed as 'ILE' in Socionics, then these Socionic individuals who are typing them, likely believe them to be ENTP in MBTI.
> 
> If you're saying that Einstein is listed as 'ILE and INTP', this doesn't make sense to me. But, if they say, 'Einstein is an ILE', then they're essentially saying, 'Einstein is an ENTP'.
> 
> _However... _Some people believe that MBTI and Socionics are mutually exclusive systems. Which would explain why some people might throw out two completely different types.
> 
> _I _do not think so, though.


I guess I'm clueless about Socionics. So Socionics ILE-ENTP is not same as MBTI ENTP? WHich casts doubt on both systems, though the ILE description in my link above describes me perfectly.


----------



## Word Dispenser

yentipeee said:


> I guess I'm clueless about Socionics. So Socionics ILE-ENTP is not same as MBTI ENTP? WHich casts doubt on both systems, though the ILE description in my link above describes me perfectly.


Socionics ILE-ENTp _is _the same as MBTI ENTp. According to me, and a lot of other people. Some people stubbornly wish to apply different types to both, but this does not make sense to me. So, it's just my opinion.

I think I'd just stick to Socionics, to make things easier for you, until you can see if there are any differences for yourself.

All in all though, the cognitive functions are the same. ILE is Ne-Ti-Fe-Si. ENTP is Ne-Ti-Fe-Si. Socionics just goes more in-depth. :kitteh:

Also, try not to put too much credence into descriptions. Relating to description can make one mistake behaviour for cognition.

I find I relate more to the IEE description than the ILE description, for instance... But, I don't have Fi... Clearly having Fi PoLR. (Aka Fi is the annoyance factor x2000 for ExTPs. :kitteh

You learn bits and pieces here and there.


----------



## yentipeee

Word Dispenser said:


> Socionics ILE-ENTp _is _the same as MBTI ENTp. According to me, and a lot of other people. Some people stubbornly wish to apply different types to both, but this does not make sense to me. So, it's just my opinion.
> 
> I think I'd just stick to Socionics, to make things easier for you, until you can see if there are any differences for yourself.
> 
> All in all though, the cognitive functions are the same. ILE is Ne-Ti-Fe-Si. ENTP is Ne-Ti-Fe-Si. Socionics just goes more in-depth. :kitteh:
> 
> Also, try not to put too much credence into descriptions. Relating to description can make one mistake behaviour for cognition.
> 
> I find I relate more to the IEE description than the ILE description, for instance... But, I don't have Fi... Clearly having Fi PoLR. (Aka Fi is the annoyance factor x2000 for ExTPs. :kitteh
> 
> You learn bits and pieces here and there.


"mistake behaviour for cognition" wow! That's why theories can get boring. Reading the forums can be more fun, and very revealing if you can read between the lines. I just don't understand why I find INTP forum so dull, and ENFP more fun & inspiring.


----------



## Word Dispenser

MsFancyPants said:


> It's been a while since I've visited this site... I am SO HAPPY to see a Socionics forum  Finally!!!


Alphas unite!


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

@_Word Dispenser_,

Does personality change per season? That could explain a lot about your changes in personality type, and the ones I've been noticing within myself.

(And if so, does that mean that it would change based on environment as well?)


----------



## Word Dispenser

Tainted Streetlight said:


> @_Word Dispenser_,
> 
> Does personality change per season? That could explain a lot about your changes in personality type, and the ones I've been noticing within myself.
> 
> (And if so, does that mean that it would change based on environment as well?)


I wouldn't think so. I'd say those are mood changes. :kitteh:


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Word Dispenser said:


> I wouldn't think so. I'd say those are mood changes. :kitteh:


Damn you're so right


----------



## Word Dispenser

I think it's odd that the Alphas have the least amount of pages in these here forums, other than the Deltas. What's up with that? Are we just.. Non-sociable, or what? :kitteh:


----------



## clay

Word Dispenser said:


> I think it's odd that the Alphas have the least amount of pages in these here forums, other than the Deltas. What's up with that? Are we just.. Non-sociable, or what? :kitteh:


In a real life social setting we would be way more gabby. We would have drinks, nice food and an overall good atmosphere. I believe that's lost online :dry:. How about we set up a Google hangout?


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Hi alphas ! :kitteh:

I made some intj observe my behaviour and he thinks I go back and forth between a grumpy delta and childish alpha. 

I think delta stuff describe me right but I loooooveee :kitteh: emoticon soo I think I may be Alpha who got lost in life, instead. J/k, I didnt get lost :crazy:


yeah, so the question is do you go to delta when you are upset about things ?


----------



## Vermillion

crashbandicoot said:


> Hi alphas ! :kitteh:
> 
> I made some intj observe my behaviour and he thinks I go back and forth between a grumpy delta and childish alpha.
> 
> I think delta stuff describe me right but I loooooveee :kitteh: emoticon soo I think I may be Alpha who got lost in life, instead. J/k, I didnt get lost :crazy:
> 
> 
> yeah, so the question is do you go to delta when you are upset about things ?


Sincerely hope you're trolling. By that logic, your avatar makes you gamma because you're all srs bsns. Guess that makes you alpha when you're happy, delta when you're upset, and gamma when you're at parties. What about beta? Have you got a leather jacket and some eyeliner?

On another note, @-Alpha-, you've got an entire thread named after you. You should be pretty proud, your world domination plans are coming to fruition.


----------



## Mr inappropriate

@Amaterasu
eyeliner is gay and I never troll. :dry:


----------



## Maelstromeater

This is directed to all those ESEs out there (I know you're listening). I've been wondering for a while now, but haven't found an ESE to as; What do you do in your free time? When you're sitting alone at home what are you doing, what are you thinking, what is it you do for fun when social interaction is unavailable? Fe seems situational whereas my Ti I can pull out at any time, so it makes me wonder how your leading function copes at home. Do you think about the day, about how people interacted? Do you devise plans and strategies for people, or do you sit there and contemplate life the universe and everything like good ol' Douglas Adams?


----------



## -Alpha-

Amaterasu said:


> Sincerely hope you're trolling. By that logic, your avatar makes you gamma because you're all srs bsns. Guess that makes you alpha when you're happy, delta when you're upset, and gamma when you're at parties. What about beta? Have you got a leather jacket and some eyeliner?
> 
> On another note, @-Alpha-, you've got an entire thread named after you. You should be pretty proud, your world domination plans are coming to fruition.


It long has been dominanted by me. This is but a monument they built for me.


----------



## Entropic

-Alpha- said:


> It long has been dominanted by me. This is but a monument they built for me.


Too bad you'd gotta fight me first. /wink


----------



## d e c a d e n t

crashbandicoot said:


> @_Amaterasu_
> eyeliner is gay and I never troll. :dry:


Who cares. It can look pretty hot on some guys.


----------



## MsFancyPants

Kink said:


> Who cares. It can look pretty hot on some guys.


Meh... I can't take them seriously.


----------



## Entropic

Kink said:


> Who cares. It can look pretty hot on some guys.


I'll let you in on a secret but she once suggested I should wear makeup. I told her NO.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> I'll let you in on a secret but she once suggested I should wear makeup. I told her NO.


You could easily be one of those feminine-looking Korean/Japanese boy-band-esque guys. 

Like the ones at 3:00






Though for some reason I think that sort of employment isn't in the cards for you.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> You could easily be one of those feminine-looking Korean/Japanese boy-band-esque guys.
> 
> Like the ones at 3:00
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Though for some reason I think that sort of employment isn't in the cards for you.


Yeah, I do take some fashion from male Asian fashion but it's definitely more on the rock/metal end so it's not as feminine I think? idk. It's harsher. 

Also that vid is funny-sad.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> Yeah, I do take some fashion from male Asian fashion but it's definitely more on the rock/metal end so it's not as feminine I think? idk. It's harsher.
> 
> Also that vid is funny-sad.


Well I assume your face naturally looks more feminine, and where I'm from, eyeliner and the rock/metal end is feminine. 


And yeah, it's a tragic aspect of culture.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Well I assume your face naturally looks more feminine, and where I'm from, eyeliner and the rock/metal end is feminine.
> 
> 
> And yeah, it's a tragic aspect of culture.


Yes, it looks feminine compared to Western standards of masculinity. I'm not Caucasian. 

Tragic is a good word. I wonder if it will be limited to Asia or continue to spread as it will become increasingly important for both men and women to have careers.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> Yes, it looks feminine compared to Western standards of masculinity. I'm not Caucasian.
> 
> Tragic is a good word. I wonder if it will be limited to Asia or continue to spread as it will become increasingly important for both men and women to have careers.


I know, but you don't have to be white to be Western. Just look at the Native Americans. *ba-dush*


I don't know much about this cultural trend outside of Japan and South Korea. In the long haul, I think Western society will either get more primitive and harder, or there will be a massive reduction in the need for employment. The latter would be very good for marriage, having kids, parenting, etc; the former could just mean more babies. But, with the cultural attitude now, it could take a couple generations before the 'more babies' attitude is prevalent in the culture (if society were to get more primitive and brutish). Although, people more accustomed to that lifestyle might be more likely to survive, and they already have plenty of kids. Either way, it doesn't matter, let's just hope we can steer it towards the massive reduction in need for employment now.


----------



## Vermillion

-Alpha- said:


> It long has been dominanted by me. This is but a monument they built for me.


hard to believe the world can be dominated by anyone who can't spell the word "dominated" right 



crashbandicoot said:


> @_Amaterasu_
> eyeliner is gay and I never troll. :dry:


You break my heart, I love eyeliner :/ Oh well, guess you're not a beta anytime soon.

Anyway, since your question was serious then -- no, it's not possible to switch quadras just because your emotions fluctuate. In an extremely superficial sense, you may resemble someone of another type if you're uncharacteristically emotional or worked up, but what leads you to reach the conclusions you do is what cognition discusses, not the behavior. Cause and not effect.


----------



## AST

No Beta outfit is complete without a hidden whip.


----------



## Vermillion

AST said:


> No Beta outfit is complete without a hidden whip.


Must it be hidden?


----------



## -Alpha-

Amaterasu said:


> hard to believe the world can be dominated by anyone who can't spell the word "dominated" right
> 
> 
> 
> You break my heart, I love eyeliner :/ Oh well, guess you're not a beta anytime soon.
> 
> Anyway, since your question was serious then -- no, it's not possible to switch quadras just because your emotions fluctuate. In an extremely superficial sense, you may resemble someone of another type if you're uncharacteristically emotional or worked up, but what leads you to reach the conclusions you do is what cognition discusses, not the behavior. Cause and not effect.


I changed the spelling after the domination.


----------



## Vermillion

-Alpha- said:


> I changed the spelling after the domination.


That's why I like post quotes, they preserve all the bs before it's smoothed over.
You know, #nofilter #nomakeup

edit: oh I misunderstood you lol. Anyway, convince everyone on this thread that your spelling is right, and I'll reconsider.


----------



## AST

Amaterasu said:


> Must it be hidden?


No, but bonus points if it isn't.


----------



## Vermillion

AST said:


> No, but bonus points if it isn't.


I think EIEs can rock the not-so-hidden whip. So can SLEs; they come in close second.


----------



## Entropic

I liked how the Se-Ni types hijacked this thread. Only military uniforms for the alphas.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> Only military uniforms for the alphas.


I don't get what you mean, but I immediately thought of this for some reason.


----------



## Entropic

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I don't get what you mean, but I immediately thought of this for some reason.


I'm inferring to that especially beta quadra is associated with the military and a kind of totalitarian logic where everyone must stand in line under the supreme ruler which goes against the softness of Ne-Si of alpha quadra wanting to wear pyjamases all day and spend their time having cozy social parties rather than the hard work approach of Se-Ni.


----------



## SilverRain

ephemereality said:


> I'm inferring to that especially beta quadra is associated with the military and a kind of totalitarian logic where everyone must stand in line under the supreme ruler which goes against the softness of Ne-Si of alpha quadra wanting to wear pyjamases all day and spend their time having cozy social parties rather than the hard work approach of Se-Ni.


I don't know my type or quadra but I'm German, so thankfully Ne has saved the day and allows me plenty of time for PJ's all day and cozy social parties, which I have to admit has some truth.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

ephemereality said:


> I'm inferring to that especially beta quadra is associated with the military and a kind of totalitarian logic where everyone must stand in line under the supreme ruler which goes against the softness of Ne-Si of alpha quadra wanting to wear pyjamases all day and spend their time having cozy social parties rather than the hard work approach of Se-Ni.


Made me think "what about pyjamas uniforms?" But then I thought of Auschwitz, which is a bit more morbid than I intended. orz


----------



## AST

ephemereality said:


> I'm inferring to that especially beta quadra is associated with the military and a kind of totalitarian logic where everyone must stand in line under the supreme ruler which goes against the softness of Ne-Si of alpha quadra wanting to wear pyjamases all day and spend their time having cozy social parties rather than the hard work approach of Se-Ni.


LSI Stamp of Approval


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

If you peeps are alphas, I suppose that makes me Omega. That's chill.


----------



## AST

We're not all Alphas. This is a smattering of Alphas, invading Gammas, and I'm the token Beta.

Also, ENTJ LII

what


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

ephemereality said:


> the softness of Ne-Si of alpha quadra wanting to wear pyjamases all day and spend their time having cozy social parties rather than the hard work approach of Se-Ni.


I'll have you know I prefer sweats.



AST said:


> Also, ENTJ LII
> 
> what


wuht


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

AST said:


> Also, ENTJ LII
> 
> what


People with one or more mental illnesses sort of 'float' around the personality spectrum. I have been diagnosed with major depressive disorder and ADHD inattentive type and for some odd reason I'm stimulated by both the world around me and my own head depending on my mood. Crazy shit. mang.


----------



## AST

...not how that works, but ok...


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

It's not a perfect system, and seeing as you've never met me I'd stay you're going out on a bit of a limb.

Telling me 'That's wrong' serves nothing but your ego, showing me why I'm wrong has the potential to teach me something that I don't already know.

Also, some people have different personalities online than they do in real life. You seem like you hold the social sciences pretty sacred so I'd love to know why you think someone who has a mood disorder can't fluctuate between introversion and extraversion depending on whether they're 'up' or 'down'.


----------



## Dragheart Luard

JSauceDaBoss said:


> It's not a perfect system, and seeing as you've never met me I'd stay you're going out on a bit of a limb.
> 
> Telling me 'That's wrong' serves nothing but your ego, showing me why I'm wrong has the potential to teach me something that I don't already know.
> 
> Also, some people have different personalities online than they do in real life. You seem like you hold the social sciences pretty sacred so I'd love to know why you think someone who has a mood disorder can't fluctuate between introversion and extraversion depending on whether they're 'up' or 'down'.


The problem with your current typing is that ENTJ/LIE and INTP/LII value different functions, so either one or both of those types are incorrect as MBTI and socionics have a common origin. Still if you want to play the ambiversion card, it doesn't work in that way, as you would be either XNTJ or XNTP.


----------



## AST

JSauceDaBoss said:


> It's not a perfect system, and seeing as you've never met me I'd stay you're going out on a bit of a limb.
> 
> Telling me 'That's wrong' serves nothing but your ego, showing me why I'm wrong has the potential to teach me something that I don't already know.
> 
> Also, some people have different personalities online than they do in real life. You seem like you hold the social sciences pretty sacred so I'd love to know why you think someone who has a mood disorder can't fluctuate between introversion and extraversion depending on whether they're 'up' or 'down'.


#1. I don't have to know you to identify an impossibility within the confines of a system.
#2. Intraversion/extraversion doesn't even begin to cover the massive shift between two opposing quadras.
#3. Intraversion/extraversion isn't an all-or-nothing scenario.


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

Common origin? Yes. The works of Carl Jung including 'The Undiscovered Self'

You guys realize that an imperfect system can be molded to fit someone who otherwise wouldn't properly fit into one of 16 different personality variations. It's not a matter of 'playing a card', I don't take any pride in being what I am. My functions are weakened because my value system switches so frequently. Trust me, it's not impressive.

If you really think you're in a position to tell me what my 'correct' socionics or MBTI type is, I'd like to know your credentials and your sources. Having met with professionals in person, I don't think either of you are in a proper place to make an assessment about my personality (having never met me in person).

You guys may have a great understanding of socionics and MBTI, but that doesn't mean you have a complete understanding of the world around you. I didn't take some test online, I've met with multiple doctors along with doing my own extensive research. So if I'm coming across as stubborn or naive, it's because I don't know you and neither of you have yet to tell me something I don't already know.


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

[No message]


----------



## AST

Assuming you are correct, you still can't be simultaneously TeNi and TiNe _at the same point in time_. Have the latent potential for both or fluctuate, fine, I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt, but you can't value both forms of logic and intuition the same time.

And no, I used bullet points because that's how I prefer to organize my thoughts when I want to be direct and concise.

Nice bit of typism, though. Reported.


----------



## Cellar Door

I just want to let you know @AST that I burst out laughing when I saw your avatar, love it.


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

"Nice bit of typism, though. Reported."

My inferior Se is telling me that I'm not welcome here.
Fair enough, I see the system as progressive and you don't. You win 'big fish', enjoy the pond. I won't post in the socionics section anymore mister 'speaks for everyone'.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

JSauceDaBoss said:


> "Nice bit of typism, though. Reported."
> 
> My inferior Se is telling me that I'm not welcome here.
> Fair enough, I see the system as progressive and you don't. You win 'big fish', enjoy the pond. I won't post in the socionics section anymore mister 'speaks for everyone'.


I don't think you seeing the system as progressive is your biggest problem, for what it's worth.


----------



## JSauceDaBoss

For what it's worth, I didn't come looking for a fight and it took a lot for me to share my diagnosis on a public forum.


----------



## CryingSpiltMilk

That was a fun read. Color me entertained.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

Ok, so a little while back I posted in both the ISFJ and ISFP forums to see if I could figure out which were more likely my dual. I posted a simple question, "yes or no?".

Results confused me for a while, but now I think I have an answer.

More people (relatively) said yes in the ISFJ forum than ISFP. Apart from the confounding occasional non-ISFx, the higher amount of ISFJ yes's could be the result of conscious vs unconscious functions.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Tainted Streetlight said:


> More people (relatively) said yes in the ISFJ forum than ISFP. Apart from the confounding occasional non-ISFx, the higher amount of ISFJ yes's could be the result of conscious vs unconscious functions.


Go oooonnnnn.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Go oooonnnnn.


Well because its easier to see your conscious functions in other people. So my prompting of a simple question of "yes or no"? Was essentially an act of Se and Fi, so the people more likely to support that proposition would be the ISFJs.

Hence, for the majority of cases... J/P switch is invalid
:shocked:roud:


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Well because its easier to see your conscious functions in other people. So my prompting of a simple question of "yes or no"? Was essentially an act of Se and Fi, so the people more likely to support that proposition would be the ISFJs.
> 
> Hence, for the majority of cases... J/P switch is invalid
> :shocked:roud:


Are you serious?? About 7 ISFJs answered yes while 3 answered no to a "yes or no?" question without any context and that makes the majority ISFjs? Asking a yes or no question is an act of Se and Fi? And by conclusion the J/P switch is invalid? That's got to be the worst experiment ever conceived by any human being, ignoring the ones that involved harming humans.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Tainted Streetlight said:


> Well because its easier to see your conscious functions in other people. So my prompting of a simple question of "yes or no"? Was essentially an act of Se and Fi, so the people more likely to support that proposition would be the ISFJs.
> 
> Hence, for the majority of cases... J/P switch is invalid
> :shocked:roud:


How was that essentially an act of Se or Fi?

And how do these empirical findings necessarily extend to all quasi-identity introverted pairs? Especially since Si is defined so differently in socionics compared to MBTI/JCF


----------



## Tainted Streetlight

=============================
|| @Pancreatic Pandora, refer to OP. ||
=============================

@_ThatOneWeirdGuy_, Se and Fi because I associate sporadic and quick interactions with Se, because the experiment itself was kind of ridiculous, Fi. It's really pretty hard to explain why I associate those behaviors with Fi and Se. It'd be much easier to show you through pictures or videos.

That action I pair in my mind with...





Also, I am only somewhat serious about the experiment. It really could only show so much, but I guess I'm using it as superficial confirmation in some ways.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Tainted Streetlight said:


> =============================
> || @Pancreatic Pandora, refer to OP. ||
> =============================
> 
> @_ThatOneWeirdGuy_, Se and Fi because I associate sporadic and quick interactions with Se, because the experiment itself was kind of ridiculous, Fi. It's really pretty hard to explain why I associate those behaviors with Fi and Se. It'd be much easier to show you through pictures or videos.
> 
> That action I pair in my mind with...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I am only somewhat serious about the experiment. It really could only show so much, but I guess I'm using it as superficial confirmation in some ways.


That was funny. :kitteh:

Especially the one where she opened the blinds. Haaa. Classic. So much overreaction.

Also, I'd think Beta quadra for the majority of these. So, like.. Se-Fe rather than Se-Fi.


----------



## VioletTru

I may be an INFP SEI. (MAYBE, mkay? New at this thing. )

Do I get a cookie?  Oh, nevermind, I'm perfectly fine with stealing them meself. *TAKE AND YOU SHALL RECEIVE*


----------



## Word Dispenser

We ran out of cookies. ThatOneWeirdGuy is notorious cookie thief. :kitteh: It's why the hangout ain't so.. uh.. populated.. These days.


----------



## HFGE

What's up Alphas? :kitteh:


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Word Dispenser said:


> We ran out of cookies. ThatOneWeirdGuy is notorious cookie thief. :kitteh: It's why the hangout ain't so.. uh.. populated.. These days.


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


>


Oh, don't look guilty. You know you're not sorry!

That's the last time @Kink will make cookies for us. :sad:


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Word Dispenser said:


> Oh, don't look guilty. You know you're not sorry!
> 
> That's the last time _Kink_ will make cookies for us. :sad:


I can't even remember what happened lol


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I can't even remember what happened lol


That's 'cause I made it up, leaving enough to the imagination. :kitteh:

I do that.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Word Dispenser said:


> That's 'cause I made it up, leaving enough to the imagination. :kitteh:
> 
> I do that.


To be fair, there was this exchange.


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> To be fair, there was this exchange.


Awesome. roud:

Coincidences rock.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Okay guys. The TV shows Warehouse 13 and How I Met Your Mother seem very Alpha-centric. Thoughts?


----------



## yentipeee

Don't watch tv, it destroys your brain cells.


----------



## Word Dispenser

yentipeee said:


> Don't watch tv, it destroys your brain cells.


I watch TV while doing productive, creative things. I like to have background noise. I also listen to music, and watch video game playthroughs. Although 'watch' is a bit of a stretch, at times.

So, in my case, I think my brain cells are fine. Thank you. :kitteh:


----------



## Elyasis

yentipeee said:


> Don't watch tv, it destroys your brain cells.


Where is the evidence that watching TV, at any amount, destroys brain cells with all else being equal? Unless you are holding your breath waiting for Sherlock to come back on TV. And that's just because of a lack of oxygen.


----------



## Psithurism

Elyasis said:


> Where is the evidence that watching TV, at any amount, destroys brain cells with all else being equal? Unless you are holding your breath waiting for Sherlock to come back on TV. And that's just because of a lack of oxygen.


Living in general kinda sucks for our cells. Your signature is fitting for the general sentiment.


----------



## Elyasis

Wistfulness said:


> Living in general kinda sucks for our cells. Your signature is fitting for the general sentiment.


It's a good thing we can make new ones.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Alphas section is so frickin' abandoned that the Gamma ILIs feel sorry for us and start having conversations thar.


----------



## Entropic

You know, I think Homer Simpson from the Simpsons and Peter Griffin from Family Guy are ESEs.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen

Amaterasu said:


> Who were you before you changed your name?


Chained Divinity. Why? :laughing:


----------



## Vermillion

Existential Justice Warrior said:


> Chained Divinity. Why? :laughing:


Oh. _That_ silly guy...
lol jk.

And well idk, I just like to keep tabs on people. It's a small forum anyway, the Socionics one.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen

Amaterasu said:


> Oh. _That_ silly guy...
> lol jk.
> 
> And well idk, I just like to keep tabs on people. It's a small forum anyway, the Socionics one.


Fair enough. I'm not really even _on_ the socionics forum, though, so...:laughing:

Also, a question back at you--how did you know I changed my name? :laughing:


----------



## Vermillion

Existential Justice Warrior said:


> Fair enough. I'm not really even _on_ the socionics forum, though, so...:laughing:
> 
> Also, a question back at you--how did you know I changed my name? :laughing:


I check the Name Changes thread sometimes.

Also that's a lot of laugh emotes. Don't you get bored making that a suffix for every sentence?


----------



## The Exception

Amaterasu said:


> Also that's a lot of laugh emotes. Don't you get bored making that a suffix for every sentence?


This is alpha territory. Laugh emotes are what we do. :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## randomshoes

Fractals and Pterodactyls said:


> I have a question for you alphas. Do you ever feel like you're being unproductive in society, that you're not contributing enough? Do you experience existential anxiety?
> 
> Reading about the *four quadras* I know that alphas tend to like to discuss theoretical concepts just for the fun and intellectual stimulation even though it isn't practical in the real world (Ti+Ne). They also like to indulge what is pleasing to the senses in a positive emotional atmosphere (Fe+Si). They also tend to avoid making long-term commitments and investments, preferring more short-term goals (devalued Te/Ni). I sometimes see these qualities as not being very conducive to making a meaningful contribution to society.
> 
> By nature I'm lazy and unproductive. By nature I just want to come up with silly theories and discuss them to death while life in the real world passes me by. I also like indulging in simple sensory pleasures the world has to offer. I don't like having to make long-term committments even though sometimes it's needed.
> 
> Contrast that with gamma that isn't so into discussing theories for fun unless it has some practical merit or even socializing or indulging in sensory pleasures for the sake. They seem to be more about productivity and meeting goals.
> 
> Alphas, do you feel like you aren't a very productive member of society just because you're doing what you're naturally inclined to do. I can be productive if needed be but my natural inclination isn't that way. I feel like I haven't accomplished much at all in my lifetime. Do other alphas feel like this? Sometimes I feel existential anxiety because it's like I have nothing to show for my existence. I haven't accomplished much. I just ponder theories and shit all day and indulge in sensory pleasures like music and food and art. I'm not exactly bettering society by doing these things. What am I here for?


I see someone is feeling their Fe dual-seek. :wink:

Anyway, I've experienced this to some extent. In general most people would consider what I spend my time doing mostly useless to society, but how I personally feel about it depends on my mood at any given moment. I think that there is always value in discussing abstraction and ideas, because you never know where the person you're talking to might take those ideas. However, the only thing that reliably makes me _feel_ constructive and useful is writing. My girlfriend always knows when I haven't written in a few days because I get listless, depressed, and uninterested for "no reason" and don't know what I "want" to do. I think I sometimes avoid writing because it _is_ work, and I always think I just want to "relax," which is true physically but not mentally. That's often an issue with alphas in my experience: we're too into relaxing in one way or another. I think it _is_ necessary to push yourself, not to magically become a gamma (which we wouldn't enjoy anyway), but to find and do that thing that turns our ideas/systems/sensory experience/ethics into something we can point to, however small or "useless." 

Of course, it can be hard to find the thing that enacts your mind in a way that works for you immediately. One thing I've found that helps me is teaching something--anything--to people. Getting involved in academia, tutoring, teaching people how to draw or the basics of astrophysics or whatever it is you know lets you contribute something to someone else's life that only an alpha would have spent the time to learn. I tutor math and writing as my job at the moment, and my ESE best friend has done a lot of tutoring and diversity work in high schools and colleges (he majored in American Ethnic Studies and Feminism). And for my other ESE friend teaching elementary school is her _thing_, and she is amazing at it.

Obviously we're all extroverts, and stuff like that might be harder for an introvert, particularly one with your tritype (or maybe just harder for people who aren't ESEs--you won't see me teaching 1st graders), but something along those lines might help. I think just communicating the things in your mind--however you can think to do that--will make you feel more a part of society.

PS: Wait, why do I know three ESEs and no SEIs? What the hell, universe???


----------



## Recede

I have come to my senses and realized I'm an alpha after all. But who knows which one. Maybe I'm some sort of balanced alpha or something. o.o


----------



## pretense

Silveresque said:


> I have come to my senses and realized I'm an alpha after all. But who knows which one. Maybe I'm some sort of balanced alpha or something. o.o


Why?


----------



## Recede

Rational Thought said:


> Why?


I figured out that what I thought was Fi is actually Fe. It took me a long time to realize this because nothing I've ever read about Fe has ever resonated. Something I said recently:



> I don't think "values" are very important, they're just biases. I think it makes more sense to try to understand reality and why individuals think/feel/act as they do than to judge them or form standards of expectation for how they should behave.
> 
> Moral character (whether a person is good or bad) doesn't really exist to me. Rather than judge or condemn people, I would prefer to seek the best outcome for each individual (and what is a good outcome depends on each individual and their emotional needs and desires).
> 
> I don't think virtue is something that needs to be taught. I think that if everyone were psychologically healthy and mature, it would come naturally. Therefore, the way to make the world a more virtuous place would be to encourage psychological health by attending to individual needs.


But I can't determine my type because none of the four alpha types seem to fit. I know I'm extremely introverted, and that I come across externally as SEI-ish. But I don't think I use Si much and 1D Ne makes no sense. LII doesn't fit too well either, since I don't think I use Ti much. ILE could almost work because I think Ne seems like my strongest/most used and most valued function, but I'm not an extravert and I don't think I even remotely resemble an Ne-dom. I've never considered ESE because it doesn't seem possible.


----------



## pretense

Silveresque said:


> But I can't determine my type because none of the four alpha types seem to fit. I know I'm extremely introverted, and that I come across externally as SEI-ish. But I don't think I use Si much and 1D Ne makes no sense. LII doesn't fit too well either, since I don't think I use Ti much. ILE could almost work because I think Ne seems like my strongest/most used and most valued function, but I'm not an extravert and I don't think I even remotely resemble an Ne-dom. I've never considered ESE because it doesn't seem possible.


This strikes me as Ti-Si. It would nicely explain the difficulty you have had in identifying your type. Actually Truthdismantled could have the same problem. Just a suggestion but I think for you reanalyzing your Ti use would be helpful.


----------



## Recede

Rational Thought said:


> This strikes me as Ti-Si. It would nicely explain the difficulty you have had in identifying your type. Actually Truthdismantled could have the same problem. Just a suggestion but I think for you reanalyzing your Ti use would be helpful.


I actually typed as H-LII-Ne until a couple hours ago when I decided I really can't be sure of my type. At this time it seems to be the closest fit, but I may be missing something if I can't see much usage of my dominant function. 

Could you explain what is Ti-Si about what I wrote?


----------



## pretense

Silveresque said:


> I actually typed as H-LII-Ne until a couple hours ago when I decided I really can't be sure of my type. At this time it seems to be the closest fit, but I may be missing something if I can't see much usage of my dominant function.
> 
> Could you explain what is Ti-Si about what I wrote?


I can't say anything for certain, as I haven't given it a lot of thought, but when Ti is the more valued function I think it's something along the lines of excessive logical analysis of perceptions from... well, shitty Si, where Si creates the illusion that what it has perceived is no less concrete reality than the colour of your walls and sort of... eternal? So Ti-Si alone designs a framework for these perceptions and you get results like, "I'm an alpha but I can't be an alpha..." Which, and I'm not entirely sure this is the case in this next quote (it might just be Ti), Ne steps in. 



Silveresque said:


> I have come to my senses and realized I'm an alpha after all. But who knows which one. Maybe I'm some sort of balanced alpha or something. o.o


"...so... (Ne I could be a balanced alpha?" Unfortunately you probably already got fucked by Si and I don't believe this is something that is easy to fix because Si in a sense is stubborn. In the end you are stuck in a loop/banging your head against a wall because your Si has provided you with false perceptions that cannot be reconciled. 

Just an idea.


----------



## Recede

Rational Thought said:


> I can't say anything for certain, as I haven't given it a lot of thought, but when Ti is the more valued function I think it's something along the lines of excessive logical analysis of perceptions from... well, shitty Si, where Si creates the illusion that what it has perceived is no less concrete reality than the colour of your walls and sort of... eternal? So Ti-Si alone designs a framework for these perceptions and you get results like, "I'm an alpha but I can't be an alpha..." Which, and I'm not entirely sure this is the case in this next quote (it might just be Ti), Ne steps in.
> 
> 
> 
> "...so... (Ne I could be a balanced alpha?" Unfortunately you probably already got fucked by Si and I don't believe this is something that is easy to fix because Si in a sense is stubborn. In the end you are stuck in a loop/banging your head against a wall because your Si has provided you with false perceptions that cannot be reconciled.
> 
> Just an idea.


My Si says this is true. Oh, wait...


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

Silveresque said:


> I figured out that what I thought was Fi is actually Fe. It took me a long time to realize this because nothing I've ever read about Fe has ever resonated. Something I said recently:
> 
> 
> 
> But I can't determine my type because none of the four alpha types seem to fit. I know I'm extremely introverted, and that I come across externally as SEI-ish. But I don't think I use Si much and 1D Ne makes no sense. LII doesn't fit too well either, since I don't think I use Ti much. ILE could almost work because I think Ne seems like my strongest/most used and most valued function, but I'm not an extravert and I don't think I even remotely resemble an Ne-dom. I've never considered ESE because it doesn't seem possible.


Er I don't think LII is a possibility at all. And ILE seems unlikely. If there's one thing you haven't done it is judging the logical consistency of the theory. Overall, you always seem to see how any claim the theory makes relates to your own experience and hardly anything seeming like a Ti analysis. I have no doubts you aren't a Ti-dom, honestly. ESE is also a weird suggestion, imo, and I don't say this only because it is my conflictor. You don't seem to have a good grasp of Fe and never use it, really, and I've already told you I think you are an irrational type. I find little reason to believe you are Ti-Fe valuing, actually...

Though I wouldn't inmediately discard Ne-dom, IEE in particular.


----------



## Recede

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> Er I don't think LII is a possibility at all. And ILE seems unlikely. If there's one thing you haven't done it is judging the logical consistency of the theory. Overall, you always seem to see how any claim the theory makes relates to your own experience and hardly anything seeming like a Ti analysis. I have no doubts you aren't a Ti-dom, honestly. ESE is also a weird suggestion, imo, and I don't say this only because it is my conflictor. You don't seem to have a good grasp of Fe and never use it, really, and I've already told you I think you are an irrational type. I find little reason to believe you are Ti-Fe valuing, actually...
> 
> Though I wouldn't inmediately discard Ne-dom, IEE in particular.


You didn't think what I said sounded like pretty clear Fe valuing? (Also my enneagram type may have something to do with my tendency to relate everything to myself.)

Actually, if you say I don't have a good grasp of Fe and never use it, that would be much more likely to fit LII than IEE. IEE has 4D Fe, as strong as an ESE's Fe.


----------



## pretense

Silveresque said:


> My Si says this is true. Oh, wait...


Do you think that you had observed this behaviour in yourself prior to me pointing it out?


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

Silveresque said:


> You didn't think what I said sounded like pretty clear Fe valuing? (Also my enneagram type may have something to do with my tendency to relate everything to myself.)


I can't say it was a clear anything. I could see a Fi creative say something like that too, it just doesn't seem to point strongly to any direction because Fe is also related to moral responsibility, just a different one. In fact, this:


> _Rather than judge or condemn people, I would prefer to seek the best outcome for each individual (and what is a good outcome depends on each individual and their emotional needs and desires)._


is still pointing towards people's subjective relationship to what is good for them. If not Fi, it is nevertheless an introverted argument because it consists of emphasizing the subjective and not any external measure of worth.



> Actually, if you say I don't have a good grasp of Fe and never use it, that would be much more likely to fit LII than IEE. IEE has 4D Fe, as strong as an ESE's Fe.


Ooops, I wrote that too quickly haha. Well, your responses to that old questionnaire seemed to point to an overall weak Fe, if I remember correctly, but idk, Fi-doms can come across as inexpressive and somewhat cold too. I don't really have an opinion of your skill at Fe but you don't seem to use it in practise.

And well, LII doesn't fit because of what I said regarding Ti. I don't think it's anything related to the enneagram either.


----------



## Recede

Rational Thought said:


> Do you think that you had observed this behaviour in yourself prior to me pointing it out?


Not sure if you interpreted it this way, but my post was meant to be ironic. 

But yes, I do think I tend to get stuck like that a lot, where something must be wrong or missing but I don't think anything is. And then someone comes along and tells me I must be missing something and I get frustrated, like "Why are you disagreeing with what I've actually observed in reality?" Observation tells me there is no function I use frequently enough for it to make sense as my dominant function. 99% of the time I'm not using any functions. And I don't think this can be disputed because how could I possibly miss something that big? But if it can't be disputed then I must not have a type. But that can't be right either, so I start looking for alternate possibilities. I look for input from others to give me fresh ideas to think about and expand possibilities. And then I get led down a clearly wrong path of thinking I must be an SEI, for example, because other people type me as that and I'm chasing after possibilities, trying to make whatever I can fit, but I'm never satisfied because ultimately I'm trying to type myself as something that requires too much stretching. And if I were to actually step back and stop overcomplicating everything I would see that I'm clearly not an Si-dom, that it's kind of ridiculous given everything I know about myself. That I've always in the past typed as INxP (MBTI) except for when I had a brief detour to INFJ. There was never any question, it was clear to me. And it's only when other people start throwing in all these other type suggestions and I go "oooh shiny new possibility" that I start getting lost in overcomplications, fueled by a sense of mental dissonance because nothing really fits as well as I think it should (ex. "It all points toward LII but I'm not nearly as Ti as other LIIs."). Finding my type is about identity but perhaps even more about achieving some sort of mental clarity. 

I told someone recently that my typing situation looks like this: 










And I want it to look like this:


----------



## Recede

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> Ooops, I wrote that too quickly haha. Well, your responses to that old questionnaire seemed to point to an overall weak Fe, if I remember correctly, but idk, Fi-doms can come across as inexpressive and somewhat cold too. I don't really have an opinion of your skill at Fe but you don't seem to use it in practise.


I used to think I was inexpressive and kind of robotic. But looking at myself in videos, I don't come across that way at all. I can actually be quite expressive and smiley, maybe a bit too much, it just seems a bit weird to me. But it's not something I'm consciously aware of doing.

Actually, two people from outside the forum both video typed me as ISFJ, but found my Ne unusually strong. So I do come across as Fe, I guess. There are people on this forum who see me as Fe as well.


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora

Silveresque said:


> I used to think I was inexpressive and kind of robotic. But looking at myself in videos, I don't come across that way at all. I can actually be quite expressive and smiley, maybe a bit too much, it just seems a bit weird to me. But it's not something I'm consciously aware of doing.
> 
> Actually, two people from outside the forum both video typed me as ISFJ, but found my Ne unusually strong. So I do come across as Fe, I guess. There are people on this forum who see me as Fe as well.


Hmm, well the real question would be if you are aware of how your emotional demonstrations affect other people and if you can use them deliberately. Also, things like wether an emotional expression is appropiate to what you sense other people's underlying feelings are, if you have that sense at all, wether you notice exaggerated or dishonest expressions and what do you think of them in those cases...

Your previous post sounded Ne-ish, however I couldn't tell for sure it wasn't inferior, since you mentioned how you looked at other people for options, possibilities. Is that what you are looking for when you go to other people or is that more like a by-product? It also leads us away from Ti dominance since you seem to lack that internal consistency. You could even be Ti-porl, as far as I know.

Huh, we are making this a type me thread


----------



## Word Dispenser

Cryo said:


> How does conversion between quadras happen? I mean, does it really work?
> 
> I have to deal with Beta STs next weekend and its important to make a good impression (there'll be some Gammas but don't think it'll be a problem. One way or another, I live in a pretty much Gamma populated place, so I get used to it. :kitteh: But Beta is another thing...). To adequately interact guess I have to decent to the very depths of Id, and not sure if I'll be able to find my way back afterwords, lol.
> 
> Is it possible to transform into Alpha, or at least to strengthen Ti-Fe axis? Or else, how to shut up Hidden Agenda and stop ignore Ignoring?


You'll always be To_August to me. :crying:

But, anyway... You can't change or strengthen your cognitive functions, as far as I know. They're unconscious and they do their own thing, and your behaviour is motivated by those things. Like a puppet.

But, the thing is-- You _do _control your own behaviour-- Your choices. If you choose to be friendly and open, then that will obviously be a behavioural choice you made, and your functions adapt to that choice.

Does that make any sense? :kitteh:


----------



## Vayne

@Word Dispenser your friend MNiS is dead.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Ramza Beoulve said:


> @_Word Dispenser_ your friend MNiS is dead.


Literally? :S

Or do you mean how she was banned for 3 months?


----------



## To_august

Word Dispenser said:


> You'll always be To_August to me. :crying:


Haha, guess it was streak of weak Ne in me. I tend to get occasionally bothered by permanency 



> But, anyway... You can't change or strengthen your cognitive functions, as far as I know. They're unconscious and they do their own thing, and your behaviour is motivated by those things. Like a puppet.
> 
> But, the thing is-- You _do control your own behaviour-- Your choices. If you choose to be friendly and open, then that will obviously be a behavioural choice you made, and your functions adapt to that choice.
> 
> Does that make any sense? :kitteh:_


That makes a lot of sense and doesn't leave much hope for me  
I'm usually in control of my behaviour, but guess they would expect more spontaneity and emotional liberation and I'm not sure how these ones can be controlled... Moreover, someone hotheadedly presented me as a sort of zinger (how could it enter their mind :frustrating and I'm expected to act certain way.
IP temperament is definitely a disadvantageous to me at this point, guess I need some energy cookies.:kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

Cryo said:


> Haha, guess it was streak of weak Ne in me. I tend to get occasionally bothered by permanency
> 
> 
> That makes a lot of sense and doesn't leave much hope for me
> I'm usually in control of my behaviour, but guess they would expect more spontaneity and emotional liberation and I'm not sure how these ones can be controlled... Moreover, someone hotheadedly presented me as a sort of zinger (how could it enter their mind :frustrating and I'm expected to act certain way.
> IP temperament is definitely a disadvantageous to me at this point, guess I need some energy cookies.:kitteh:


Well, I wish you luck and hope it goes well. I'm sure you'll do fine, though. You seem like someone that everyone would like, even if you don't 'blend in' with a particular group.

You don't have to fit in to be liked, y'know. 

I tend to be rather quirky in my way, but people tend to respond favourably to it, because they sense I don't mean any harm, maybe?

Or maybe Alphas are just generally likeable. :kitteh: But, that would encourage typism, so I don't subscribe to that thought thread personally.

All the quadras are likeable in their own ways. Just project it. Or something. haha.


----------



## tangosthenes

Idk man I'm too spaced out and have a hard time giving a crap for long enough to follow anyone's words to be of use in most group situations, but I notice that if I present a happy, welcoming image, it sort of suffices. It covers the rest of your actions with that impression so that as long as you show a little bit of cheer during the rest of your actions, they won't know the difference.

Shouldn't have to be fake though.


----------



## Word Dispenser

I like the descriptiveness of the book, "The Last Unicorn" By Peter S. Beagle. The animated movie is pretty good too. :kitteh:

Here is an excerpt:

"_The unicorn lived in a lilac wood, and she lived all alone. She was very old, though she did not know it, and she was no longer the careless color of sea foam, but rather the color of snow falling on a moonlit night. But her eyes were still clear and unwearied, and she still moved like a shadow on the sea.

She did not look anything like a horned horse, as unicorns are often pictured, being smaller and cloven-hoofed, and possessing that oldest, wildest grace that horses have never had, that deer have only in a shy, thin imitation and goats in dancing mockery. 

Her neck was long and slender, making her head seem smaller than it was, and the mane that fell almost to the middle of her back was as soft as dandelion fluff and as fine as cirrus. She had pointed ears and thin legs, with feathers of white hair at the ankles; and the long horn above her eyes shone and shivered with its own seashell light even in the deepest midnight._"


----------



## LibertyPrime

<.< every time my eyes glance over the title of this thread I read: al qaeda lol...wtf!?


----------



## Word Dispenser

FreeBeer said:


> <.< every time my eyes glance over the title of this thread I read: al qaeda lol...wtf!?


It's your inner-Gamma. :laughing:


----------



## Recede

Word Dispenser said:


> I like the descriptiveness of the book, "The Last Unicorn" By Peter S. Beagle. The animated movie is pretty good too. :kitteh:
> 
> Here is an excerpt:
> 
> "_The unicorn lived in a lilac wood, and she lived all alone. She was very old, though she did not know it, and she was no longer the careless color of sea foam, but rather the color of snow falling on a moonlit night. But her eyes were still clear and unwearied, and she still moved like a shadow on the sea.
> 
> She did not look anything like a horned horse, as unicorns are often pictured, being smaller and cloven-hoofed, and possessing that oldest, wildest grace that horses have never had, that deer have only in a shy, thin imitation and goats in dancing mockery.
> 
> Her neck was long and slender, making her head seem smaller than it was, and the mane that fell almost to the middle of her back was as soft as dandelion fluff and as fine as cirrus. She had pointed ears and thin legs, with feathers of white hair at the ankles; and the long horn above her eyes shone and shivered with its own seashell light even in the deepest midnight._"


I love that movie, I was just thinking about it yesterday. Something about the art style gives me the strangest feeling. It feels so...ancient. It's as if it touches on something unconscious. 






:kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

Silveresque said:


> I love that movie, I was just thinking about it yesterday. Something about the art style gives me the strangest feeling. It feels so...ancient. It's as if it touches on something unconscious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :kitteh:


I watched it religiously when I was quite young, and even a few times for nostalgia's sake, and I'd agree. It has this ancient artifact quality to it that is uniquely its own-- I have always said that despite the premise of it, it has very mature content... Especially for the four-year-old that I was.

That said, I won't hesitate to show it to _my _four year olds, if I have any.


----------



## Word Dispenser

So, the government in the country I'm living in had me do a bunch of lengthy quizes to find out job stuff.

One of them surprised me at being MBTI.

So, now I'm an INTP according to this thingie, and they're going to find me jobs accordingly. 

I'm taking it all in stride, really, but I wonder at how effective 'getting to know you' really is, when you are supposed to take a bunch of tests instead of actually talking to the person. Obviously the tests are going to be inaccurate-- You're basically marking yourself. And we all tend to mark ourselves in terms more of an ideal than the actuality.

Basically, they ended up making suggestions that I _had already suggested. _So, it was kinda like being ignored.

Honestly, I don't mind it-- I think it's kind of funny to be getting this out of MBTI. I certainly wasn't expecting it to be used as a tool, and I'm not really sure I'd want it to be.

I guess we'll see where I end up vocationally.


----------



## Chesire Tower

Well now that I've been typed correctly; I feel free to come home to my REAL™ quadra.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Chesire Tower said:


> Well now that I've been typed correctly; I feel free to come home to my REAL™ quadra.


Welcome!


----------



## Chesire Tower

Word Dispenser said:


> Welcome!


Thanks! I always knew I liked Alpha best; I guess that ought to have been a clue? 

XD


----------



## Word Dispenser

New Alpha theme song! :kitteh:


----------



## All is One

I just did my first Socionics-Test. It says I am

ILE-2Ne (ENTp)

Description:

Using extroverted intuition as her base function and introverted thinking as her creative, the ILE is adept at generating a thousand solutions for the same problem. Unlike the LII who is bound by the rules he follows, the ILE sees these same rules as flexible and enabling--they can be altered and adjusted to enable every new idea the ILE conceives. In fact, the rules are often completely rewritten for every new idea the ILE has. At her best, the ILE is capable of learning complex and abstract concepts faster than almost any other sociotype and building off this knowledge to create a multitude of theories and ideas. At her worst, the ILE is often so inundated by new thoughts that actualizing one singular idea to fruition can be difficult. And although the ILE is good at understanding more abstract phenomena, the ILE often struggles understanding the more nuanced societal norms of interaction, which can cause her to be unsure of the appropriate action when socializing.

Uuuuhm. I don't know much about Socionics yet. So does this preclude that I am ENTJ @ MBTI? Hue.


----------



## Word Dispenser

All is One said:


> I just did my first Socionics-Test. It says I am
> 
> ILE-2Ne (ENTp)
> 
> Description:
> 
> Using extroverted intuition as her base function and introverted thinking as her creative, the ILE is adept at generating a thousand solutions for the same problem. Unlike the LII who is bound by the rules he follows, the ILE sees these same rules as flexible and enabling--they can be altered and adjusted to enable every new idea the ILE conceives. In fact, the rules are often completely rewritten for every new idea the ILE has. At her best, the ILE is capable of learning complex and abstract concepts faster than almost any other sociotype and building off this knowledge to create a multitude of theories and ideas. At her worst, the ILE is often so inundated by new thoughts that actualizing one singular idea to fruition can be difficult. And although the ILE is good at understanding more abstract phenomena, the ILE often struggles understanding the more nuanced societal norms of interaction, which can cause her to be unsure of the appropriate action when socializing.
> 
> Uuuuhm. I don't know much about Socionics yet. So does this preclude that I am ENTJ @ MBTI? Hue.


I've seen your posts. I've suspected you were ILE (ENTP in MBTI). :kitteh:


----------



## All is One

Word Dispenser said:


> I've seen your posts. I've suspected you were ILE (ENTP in MBTI). :kitteh:


Hmmmm. You know, right from the start (when I first grappled with MBTI) it was pretty obvious that I am ENTX. Anyone that knows me could have told you easily. But with the J/P - thing I struggled. There is a old thread of mine, where I posted some stereotypical facts that I seem to share with ENTJ's:

_-	My brain is filled with tonnes of random useless facts
-	I can’t or wont lose a debate
-	back in school I discussed things with my teacher in a calm manner and later found out that people viewed it as an argument or fierce quarrel
-	I have the calmest head in a crisis
-	People always chose me to be the speaker/leader/captain of the group even when I didn’t want to
-	I finish peoples “what was his name” sentences or any other sentence where they stop talking due to a brain freeze
-	I can remember what someone said a month ago in the exact words
-	I view everything through the cost-benefit prism
-	I have a logical reason for everything I do or say
-	I appreciate people that make sense
-	People hate my guts because I always say the obvious truth that everyone is silent about
-	I frequently take necessary precautions to prevent potential future problems in my daily life
-	Almost nothing can surprise me
-	I say that I don’t care about what to do for the evening and other people think I am hiding what I really want to do … in reality I really don’t care! And if I did I would have immediately said what I wanted and expected.
-	I always say “organisation and preparation are the keys to success”
-	I love speaking in public
-	I am totally optimistic / anything goes!
-	The best gift I ever got was something that I really could use
-	Sometimes I cannot see the most obvious things
-	My patience levels are very high with a select few. With that few I loose my temper and kind of explode (mostly for pretty silly things)
-	I love little aesthetic objects when the overall scene is a big mess
-	my physical appearance is only as important as what it can do for me_

What also confused me are the functions of ENTJ vs. ENTP themselves:

ENTJ = Te/Ni/Se/Fi
ENTP = Ne/Ti/Fe/Si

Back then the ENTJ-Functions made more sense to me, but now as I reconsider the ENTP functions I think I start to see something I didn't see back then ... . Hmmmmmmmmm.

EDIT: @Word Dispenser: Referring to what you wrote: Really? What made you think so? Can you elaborate or did you "feel" it?


----------



## Word Dispenser

All is One said:


> Hmmmm. You know, right from the start (when I first grappled with MBTI) it was pretty obvious that I am ENTX. Anyone that knows me could have told you easily. But with the J/P - thing I struggled. There is a old thread of mine, where I posted some stereotypical facts that I seem to share with ENTJ's:
> 
> _- My brain is filled with tonnes of random useless facts
> - I can’t or wont lose a debate
> - back in school I discussed things with my teacher in a calm manner and later found out that people viewed it as an argument or fierce quarrel
> - I have the calmest head in a crisis
> - People always chose me to be the speaker/leader/captain of the group even when I didn’t want to
> - I finish peoples “what was his name” sentences or any other sentence where they stop talking due to a brain freeze
> - I can remember what someone said a month ago in the exact words
> - I view everything through the cost-benefit prism
> - I have a logical reason for everything I do or say
> - I appreciate people that make sense
> - People hate my guts because I always say the obvious truth that everyone is silent about
> - I frequently take necessary precautions to prevent potential future problems in my daily life
> - Almost nothing can surprise me
> - I say that I don’t care about what to do for the evening and other people think I am hiding what I really want to do … in reality I really don’t care! And if I did I would have immediately said what I wanted and expected.
> - I always say “organisation and preparation are the keys to success”
> - I love speaking in public
> - I am totally optimistic / anything goes!
> - The best gift I ever got was something that I really could use
> - Sometimes I cannot see the most obvious things
> - My patience levels are very high with a select few. With that few I loose my temper and kind of explode (mostly for pretty silly things)
> - I love little aesthetic objects when the overall scene is a big mess
> - my physical appearance is only as important as what it can do for me_
> 
> What also confused me are the functions of ENTJ vs. ENTP themselves:
> 
> ENTJ = Te/Ni/Se/Fi
> ENTP = Ne/Ti/Fe/Si
> 
> Back then the ENTJ-Functions made more sense to me, but now as I reconsider the ENTP functions I think I start to see something I didn't see back then ... . Hmmmmmmmmm.
> 
> EDIT: @_Word Dispenser_: Referring to what you wrote: Really? What made you think so? Can you elaborate or did you "feel" it?


Alpha vibes. WE ALPHAS KNOW OUR OWN. Haha. roud:

Anyway, don't look at behavioural traits or interests-- Look at functions. Look at Sociotype.com: Socionics Applied ... Research and figure out where you fit. Along the left hand side, you'll see Quadras-- Check out Alpha, and Gamma, and see which one fits you better. I think you'll probably agree at that point.


----------



## All is One

Word Dispenser said:


> Alpha vibes. WE ALPHAS KNOW OUR OWN. Haha. roud:
> 
> Anyway, don't look at behavioural traits or interests-- Look at functions. Look at Sociotype.com: Socionics Applied ... Research and figure out where you fit. Along the left hand side, you'll see Quadras-- Check out Alpha, and Gamma, and see which one fits you better. I think you'll probably agree at that point.


Well, the functions ... Boom. I don't know what to say right now, except: Hello fellow ENTP's ... xD.


----------



## Word Dispenser

All is One said:


> Well, the functions ... Boom. I don't know what to say right now, except: Hello fellow ENTP's ... xD.


Also, you're a 9... So, maybe that's the only place where the similarities collide in general-- Enneagram can change everything. :kitteh:

But, meh. You still seem like Alpha.


----------



## All is One

Word Dispenser said:


> Also, you're a 9... So, maybe that's the only place where the similarities collide in general-- Enneagram can change everything. :kitteh:
> 
> But, meh. You still seem like Alpha.


Jup, but 9w8. Healthy I'd suppose. So I think the 8-Wing can explain why I can be pretty goal-oriented, for example. But exactly this is what it's all about: I *can*. Not I *am*.


----------



## All is One

Omg. Why didn't I find this description earlier? It is ... *gulps* ... amazing ... oO.

Socionics Types: ILE-ENTp


----------



## Word Dispenser

All is One said:


> Omg. Why didn't I find this description earlier? It is ... *gulps* ... amazing ... oO.
> 
> Socionics Types: ILE-ENTp


Welcome to understanding how awesome you are.

Welcome, namely, to Alpha.

Cupcakes are on a stand. Don't eat the ones with sprinkles. Those are reserved for @ThatOneWeirdGuy


----------



## Word Dispenser

All is One said:


> Jup, but 9w8. Healthy I'd suppose. So I think the 8-Wing can explain why I can be pretty goal-oriented, for example. But exactly this is what it's all about: I *can*. Not I *am*.


Yeah, I'm 9w8 as well. It's more common in ENTPs than you'd think.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

All is One said:


> Jup, but 9w8. Healthy I'd suppose. So I think the 8-Wing can explain why I can be pretty goal-oriented, for example. But exactly this is what it's all about: I *can*. Not I *am*.


Well, 9 also integrate to 3, which I imagine can also make a healthy 9 goal-oriented.


----------



## Word Dispenser

What a mess.

Could I be second-guessing my type again?

Maybe I'm actually _Ti_-PoLR. 
Could I actually _not _be Alpha? :crying:

Cheesus. The havarti.

Or, am I just an xSFJ?

WHAT AM I DOING WITH MY _LIFE_.

AAAHHHHHH.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Word Dispenser said:


> What a mess.
> 
> Could I be second-guessing my type again?
> 
> Maybe I'm actually _Ti_-PoLR.
> Could I actually _not _be Alpha? :crying:
> 
> Cheesus. The havarti.
> 
> Or, am I just an xSFJ?
> 
> WHAT AM I DOING WITH MY _LIFE_.
> 
> AAAHHHHHH.


I've always thought you were Alpha SF, especially SEI


----------



## Word Dispenser

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I've always thought you were Alpha SF, especially SEI


Well, there you go.

I have that as my label now. 

Husfiend says so too.
@Amaterasu: Seee?


----------



## Recede

I might be the most atypical ENTp in existence. 

But most likely I just don't have a type.

Can I have a cupcake anyways? :kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

Silveresque said:


> I might be the most atypical ENTp in existence.
> 
> But most likely I just don't have a type.
> 
> Can I have a cupcake anyways? :kitteh:


I'unno... Someone's makin' baked goods and whatnot. I'm just eating them. :kitteh:

They don't appear to be poisoned, luckily.

Be wary of those Gamma cupcakes though.


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Word Dispenser said:


> Silveresque said:
> 
> 
> 
> I might be the most atypical ENTp in existence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But most likely I just don't have a type.
> 
> Can I have a cupcake anyways?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'unno... Someone's makin' baked goods and whatnot. I'm just eating them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't appear to be poisoned, luckily.
> 
> Be wary of those Gamma cupcakes though.
Click to expand...

I have been making those, glad you liked them, not so glad you didnt remember me though.

*warningossible gamma sf in disguise*

See im nice, i even came in with a warning.


----------



## Word Dispenser

crashbandicoot said:


> I am making those, glad you liked them, not so glad you didnt remember me though.
> 
> *warningossible gamma sf in disguise*
> 
> See im nice, i even came in with a warning.:kitteh:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Word Dispenser said:


> crashbandicoot said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am making those, glad you liked them, not so glad you didnt remember me though.
> 
> *warningossible gamma sf in disguise*
> 
> See im nice, i even came in with a warning.
Click to expand...

Those ddt's must have tasted better than I thought.


----------



## Word Dispenser

crashbandicoot said:


> Those ddt's must have tasted better than I thought.:kitteh:


I couldn't find a gif with someone spitting out a cupcake and dying from poison. :crying:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Word Dispenser said:


> I couldn't find a gif with someone spitting out a cupcake and dying from poison. :crying:


Haha, I won. erc2:

Dont worry though, it was just a mean gamma joke. Here, have some cookies too and relax :kitteh:
@Silveresque

I was trying a new recipe and I messed up cooking your fish, sorry. You'll have a wait a bit more, I told peeps to go to market and buy some more fish.


----------



## Recede

crashbandicoot said:


> @_Silveresque_
> 
> I was trying a new recipe and I messed up cooking your fish, sorry. You'll have a wait a bit more, I told peeps to go to market and buy some more fish.












You mean these weren't the fish I was supposed to eat? :shocked:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Silveresque said:


> You mean these weren't the fish I was supposed to eat? :shocked:


*gulp* No, you didnt. Nooooooooooo :crying::crying::crying:

Oh, well. Seems like you won. :frustrating:


----------



## Recede

crashbandicoot said:


> *gulp* No, you didnt. Nooooooooooo :crying::crying::crying:
> 
> Oh, well. Seems like you won. :frustrating:


I only ate one or two...or maybe seven. 

What did I win?


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Silveresque said:


> I only ate one or two...or maybe seven.
> 
> What did I win?


:th_sur:

More fish or cookies. You get to choose this time. :kitteh:


----------



## Recede

crashbandicoot said:


> :th_sur:
> 
> More fish or cookies. You get to choose this time. :kitteh:


I want a cookie!


----------



## Impossibility




----------



## Word Dispenser

Time moves much slower for an olive. Especially one that still contains a pit.

It doesn't take long for the olive to be plucked from the branch, haphazardly cleaned, and sent on its way. In human time, that accounts for approximately 30 minutes. Of course it depends on if the olive is red, black, or green. They say that the rawer the colour is, the quicker the time flies.

But, to _any _olive, the time within 30 minutes is tremendous. An eternity passes in a minute and 23.8 milliseconds. For a black olive, at least. But, how is an eternity measured, exactly? What does eternity _mean_? Is it possible for an eternity to happen when it surely couldn't have happened? Or is it happening right now? How can it happen within a time frame at all when that is, effectively, an oxymoron? 

You'd have to ask the olive, who is well-versed with such things. 

It probably wouldn't tell you anything. Olives don't generally make good conversationalists. Believe me, I've tried. Cursing at it for stubbornly clinging to its innards also produces little air time.

But, regardless of its timid nature, if it's especially lucky, with some of its siblings, it will manage to nearly choke the person who attempts to eat it in a dish. 

Because of an absentminded chef slipping in the pits with the olives. 

An absentminded chef like me, for instance.

My poor husband.


----------



## Word Dispenser

So, I'm getting set up with some kind of job, at some point. Which is pretty exciting.

I showed my social worker person, or whatever you wanna call 'em, my drawings and paintings. So, they're going to get in contact with some different art schools, find out who to contact from there, and maybe I'll get an apprenticeship or something, having to do with what I can do.

I don't know what to expect. If I get to do art, will it be good enough? Will I be given leeway to improve? I wonder what kind of opportunities are around the corner for me. I have to try not to get _too _excited.

Time for art boasting! I'll be bringing these and others with me on an interview. That's what I was told, anyway. My hopes aren't high though-- I expect it's possible they will say, "Sorry, couldn't find an art job for you, so no need to take your drawings."

Still, I impressed them, so maybe that will give me the push I need to get ahead of other people who are demanding these jobs.



















So, yeah. I can copy master paintings from scratch digitally. Photoshop and a wacom.

Maybe I'll actually learn to draw, too. :tongue:

I have potential. I'll get there. Hopefully.


----------



## Entropic

@Word Dispenser you are familiar with that Gulenko thinks LIIs think of time as something you can manipulate in that you can speed it up and down, but ILIs see its properties as static and thus moves at the same pace?



> There exists a certain rhythm within the socion which creates energy maximums and energy minimums or depressions. Energy minimum is the most incomprehensible, the most complex state. Among the types which play a key role in states of such energy minimums, role which in chaos theory is known as bifurcation (path selection, development at critical points), there is only one out of four types that has the most power to shift the dynamics either one or the other way. Thus, informational time (lets call it T1) - is ILI, intuitive logical introvert. ILI is most perceptive of the informational time flow; LII is most perceptive of energy flow. These two types are very similar to each other in terms of their mission. For ILI intuition of time comes first, and then comes structuring of this time flow. For LII it is the other way around, that is, first structure - then time. They are as if left and right hand images of each other. The clock of the socion, figuratively speaking, has 16 divisions instead of 12. LII, take Kant for example, it was well known that he was like a walking clock. He always knew what time it was up to the last minute. *He felt the energy flow, knew when to up his pace, or when to slow down to arrive at destination in time.*
> 
> ILI's perception is quite different. He is not in a hurry anywhere. *This time flow is linear, the time of philosopher who thinks that one can never keep up with time, that it is constantly flowing, everything changes, while you're trying to do something the situation will no longer be the same. It is best to wait for when it will comes back, and you are already sitting prepared for it.* These are two very different perceptions of flow of time. It is generally the time of ILI that prevails because on large scale the preferred ring is the right/process one. In large groups, it is most often the right types that lead and set the tempo for the group. In small groups, the opposite is true: time flow is more uneven, you can speed it up or you can slow it down. Now lets examine how time flows within each quadra.


----------



## Word Dispenser

@Entropic


I've certainly read it, and I think I understand the perspectives.

In regards to me, I'm a bit like LII in the way it's described. Normally, I will notice what the time is, and when to leave to reach a destination at a particular time. Sometimes I'll put off leaving, because I'm a bit of a slow starter, and I will end up running part of the way. I'm very rarely late, and when I am, it's because I procrastinated. The last appointment I had, I was 1 minute early. :laughing:

It's by no means a perfect system, though. I don't always know exactly what time it is, as Kant is described as knowing, but I can usually ballpark it fairly well.

There's also this odd phenomenon where I will wake up at approximately the time I want to wake up. Like an internal alarm.

It failed once. I was 10 minutes late for a doctor's appointment, because my _actual _alarm didn't go off, and I had strange sleeping patterns.
Are you implying something, you devil? Or are you just making conversation? :kitteh:


----------



## Vermillion

Word Dispenser said:


> There's also this odd phenomenon where I will wake up at approximately the time I want to wake up. Like an internal alarm.


It's easy enough to control. Try thinking hard enough about the time you want to wake up the next morning, and you _will _wake up at that time, provided your sleep patterns aren't terrible.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Amaterasu said:


> It's easy enough to control. Try thinking hard enough about the time you want to wake up the next morning, and you _will _wake up at that time, provided your sleep patterns aren't terrible.


Yep, seems to work that way! :th_woot:


----------



## Entropic

Word Dispenser said:


> @Entropic
> 
> 
> I've certainly read it, and I think I understand the perspectives.
> 
> In regards to me, I'm a bit like LII in the way it's described. Normally, I will notice what the time is, and when to leave to reach a destination at a particular time. Sometimes I'll put off leaving, because I'm a bit of a slow starter, and I will end up running part of the way. I'm very rarely late, and when I am, it's because I procrastinated. The last appointment I had, I was 1 minute early. :laughing:
> 
> It's by no means a perfect system, though. I don't always know exactly what time it is, as Kant is described as knowing, but I can usually ballpark it fairly well.
> 
> There's also this odd phenomenon where I will wake up at approximately the time I want to wake up. Like an internal alarm.
> 
> It failed once. I was 10 minutes late for a doctor's appointment, because my _actual _alarm didn't go off, and I had strange sleeping patterns.
> Are you implying something, you devil? Or are you just making conversation? :kitteh:


No, simply alluding to that I think this is probably a property that is shared among all alpha NTs though it is the most prominent in the LII, and then gamma NTs and the most prominently in the ILI, respectively. I was just thinking about that because of the way you described the perspective of time from the point of view of the olive; perhaps because of Te, I have a hard time grasping seeing how time would in a sense, run differently for an olive than it does a human being. Life spans are different yes, maturation and cellular decay differ, but at some level I do think time runs at the same fundamental rate for everyone. Our perspective differs in that a dayfly will do what most humans struggle to accomplish in a lifetime, but does it mean that the one day the dayfly lives is actually equivalent to the lifetime of a human being? 

And I don't think so. Or impression of the compression and expansion of time depends from the vantage point we are looking at, but the very logic of time itself, it does not change. A day is a day and I think if anything, what's far more fascinating is all the actions that simultaneously occur within that day; for some beings it means their demise, for others, rebirth, and so it goes on and on in this cyclical property that we call time. 

I never once thought that while the universe itself may be finite that time has a clear beginning and an end; I always found that extremely dubious and it seems that the more we explore theoretical physics, the more it also seems that there is indeed no real beginning or end of time. Of course the question becomes, then what is our conceptualization if we so to say, always existed? 

I am not sure how I feel about whether an object can always objectively exist or not, since human beings define existence in terms of being and non-being so being can only be a property in relation to non-being, but I do not believe in a real end. The end is merely the transmission to something new or, if you are into the holographic principle, in a sense, we actually never existed at all.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Entropic said:


> No, simply alluding to that I think this is probably a property that is shared among all alpha NTs though it is the most prominent in the LII, and then gamma NTs and the most prominently in the ILI, respectively. I was just thinking about that because of the way you described the perspective of time from the point of view of the olive; perhaps because of Te, I have a hard time grasping seeing how time would in a sense, run differently for an olive than it does a human being. Life spans are different yes, maturation and cellular decay differ, but at some level I do think time runs at the same fundamental rate for everyone. Our perspective differs in that a dayfly will do what most humans struggle to accomplish in a lifetime, but does it mean that the one day the dayfly lives is actually equivalent to the lifetime of a human being?
> 
> And I don't think so. Or impression of the compression and expansion of time depends from the vantage point we are looking at, but the very logic of time itself, it does not change. A day is a day and I think if anything, what's far more fascinating is all the actions that simultaneously occur within that day; for some beings it means their demise, for others, rebirth, and so it goes on and on in this cyclical property that we call time.
> 
> I never once thought that while the universe itself may be finite that time has a clear beginning and an end; I always found that extremely dubious and it seems that the more we explore theoretical physics, the more it also seems that there is indeed no real beginning or end of time. Of course the question becomes, then what is our conceptualization if we so to say, always existed?
> 
> I am not sure how I feel about whether an object can always objectively exist or not, since human beings define existence in terms of being and non-being so being can only be a property in relation to non-being, but I do not believe in a real end. The end is merely the transmission to something new or, if you are into the holographic principle, in a sense, we actually never existed at all.


Well, theoretically, I think similarly. I think of time as cyclical, and merely about growth and change rather than anything finite. When everything ceases to exist, time will still exist, I think. But, in the everyday, it's measured and controlled, in a way. Not so much that I control it, but I control myself within time, and am able to keep pace with it. I kind of feel fortunate, because time doesn't seem quick for me as it is for others-- So I'm able to savour my moments, without having to feel that they're rushing past. Still, if possible, I plan to increase my lifespan and aim for immortality in some way or another-- There's just too much to learn and experience within this meager existence.

Insofar as ends and beginnings, they are just words that humans came up with to express concepts of growth and time. But, time is, in some ways, beyond our comprehension as a whole. I've often wondered what the _reason _for time is. I know the why, but not the how, or the what for? It's kind of refreshing to remember that query, so I have to thank you. It's one of those questions I come back to every few years.

As for my little olive tale, it was something quirky and fictional, but based on a true story (haha). I watched a bit of the movie, "Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy", and I wanted to emulate that odd kind of narrative. I swear, I think I heard Stephen Fry in my head. Seriously, read the story again, in Stephen Fry's voice. You'll see what I mean.

Of course, Hitchhiker's is a pretty Alpha NT narrative anyway, I think. My husband, whom I don't know the type of anymore, honestly, thinks that it's quite dumb, though. :kitteh:

If you've ever read Terry Pratchett, it has a similar quirkiness. And Dr. Who, but in a different vein.


----------



## tangosthenes

A day is a day but your experience of how a day feels time-wise will change.

It will feel like 10 minutes has passed, but it's been an hour. And then you'll use that gauge for how an hour feels today to regulate your time sense(and hopefully slow it down, because that's quick as hell).


----------



## Word Dispenser

tangosthenes said:


> A day is a day but your experience of how a day feels time-wise will change.


Truth.


----------



## Entropic

Word Dispenser said:


> Well, theoretically, I think similarly. I think of time as cyclical, and merely about growth and change rather than anything finite. When nothing ceases to exist, time will still exist, I think. But, in the everyday, it's measured and controlled, in a way. Not so much that I control it, but I control myself within time, and am able to keep pace with it. I kind of feel fortunate, because time doesn't seem quick for me as it is for others-- So I'm able to savour my moments, without having to feel that they're rushing past. Still, if possible, I plan to increase my lifespan and aim for immortality in some way or another-- There's just too much to learn and experience within this meager existence.
> 
> Insofar as ends and beginnings, they are just words that humans came up with to express concepts of growth and time. But, time is, in some ways, beyond our comprehension as a whole. I've often wondered what the _reason _for time is. I know the why, but not the how, or the what for? It's kind of refreshing to remember that query, so I have to thank you. It's one of those questions I come back to every few years.
> 
> As for my little olive tale, it was something quirky and fictional, but based on a true story (haha). I watched a bit of the movie, "Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy", and I wanted to emulate that odd kind of narrative. I swear, I think I heard Stephen Fry in my head. Seriously, read the story again, in Stephen Fry's voice. You'll see what I mean.
> 
> Of course, Hitchhiker's is a pretty Alpha NT narrative anyway, I think. My husband, whom I don't know the type of anymore, honestly, thinks that it's quite dumb, though. :kitteh:
> 
> If you've ever read Terry Pratchett, it has a similar quirkiness. And Dr. Who, but in a different vein.


Hm, I am of the thought that time is simply a property of change, but has become objectified in Western language because it's easier to conceptualize it that way. Not every culture perceives time as something that exists on its own, but is an inherent property in how we interact with the world. Unfortunately I can't recall any specific examples as I heard about that many years ago in a university course I was taking at the time.

And I think what you describe is very typical for Ne and the judicious quadra I think. One thing that I find is different between judicious and decisive quadras is that judicious quadras seem to in a sense, feel like they got all the time in the world. There is more of an immediacy and urgency to the decisive quadras (well, the Se ego types anyway), that is lacking in the judicious ones. ILIs and IEIs are known for their ability to "sit and wait" but it's because of how you in a sense, feel detached from it. The movement of time, it is not something that I meddle or interfere with as much as I simply observe its unfoldment because I see how things are moving so while I can predict this unfoldment to one degree or another, I think there is a certain defeatist attitude to the IP temperament. You feel tied down to the flow and don't want to interfere with it like Pe types do. They have a destructive property in how they interact with the Pi forces in the universe, almost like wanting to break it down and toy with it to see what they can do with it for their own personal amusement. 

Another thing which I think is interesting in relation to this are the enneagram types. 6 is known for its sense of seeing life as transient for example, and 8 for the here and now, 9 for its refusal to be tied down to any movement but their own etc. This also affects the relationship to the Pe and Pi forces. 

And I am not sure everything has to have a reason, personally. Sometimes things just are and they exist because that is how things are meant to be, simply. 

And yes, I've read quite a fair bit of Pratchett as an adolescent. I suppose I found some of his books mildly humorous, but I think they spoke more to my LII dad actually, in retrospect. I don't recall Stephen Fry's voice so that inquiry isn't working, lol. I do otherwise have a retarded auditory memory recall and associative ability though, to the point it sometimes causes auditory hallucinations. I may for example go play a LoL game and then go away from the computer while the game is loading and while away I can be utterly sure I hear the announcement voice "welcome to the Summoner's Rift" and stuff like that, even though the game is still loading etc. 

And well, he's not an Ne type, I think we concluded that much. Probably why he thinks it's dumb. I can appreciate Ne in small doses but it's definitely not what I can stomach in any larger amounts. Reminds me that you were a fan of David Eddings, too, right? Also such an alpha NT author. I did read a couple of his series including the more famous Belgarion but it's not my preferred fantasy style. Not sure if you know, but I enjoyed the Shannara series by Terry Brooks a lot. Not the prequels so much, but the main four books appeal a lot to me, more Se-Ni dark than Ne-Si fantastical. I've also had a thing for fiction where the main character has a mental breakdown which happened in the Shannara series so there's that, lol.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Entropic said:


> And well, he's not an Ne type, I think we concluded that much. Probably why he thinks it's dumb. I can appreciate Ne in small doses but it's definitely not what I can stomach in any larger amounts. Reminds me that you were a fan of David Eddings, too, right? Also such an alpha NT author. I did read a couple of his series including the more famous Belgarion but it's not my preferred fantasy style. Not sure if you know, but I enjoyed the Shannara series by Terry Brooks a lot. Not the prequels so much, but the main four books appeal a lot to me, more Se-Ni dark than Ne-Si fantastical. I've also had a thing for fiction where the main character has a mental breakdown which happened in the Shannara series so there's that, lol.


Aah, I have the Terry Brooks series' in my library-- I actually prefer him to Eddings. I read the Landover series and the Running with the Demon series in particular, but I haven't _really _gotten into Shannara. I did play the computer game, though. It's on my reading list. The fact that I've _got _the oodles of Shannara books is testament to that. Just gotta pick 'em up. But, I'm a bit of a completionist, so I gotta finish Belgarath and Polgara first.

And I was thinking of reading some classic literature for awhile. But, _then _Shannara, for sure!

Re-reading the Eddings' books, I hadn't read them since I was 8 - 12, or something like that. I thought he was either an Si-Fe or an Si-Te, actually. But, it kind of makes sense that he'd be Alpha NT, maybe even Ne-dom, because the work is really disjointed. The idea of a 'Necessity' being the instrument of change in the books kind of seems like an Ne halfheartedly trying to find a way to make everything fit and tie together. Now that I've re-read the Belgariad, the Mallorean, and almost through 'Belgarath the Sorcerer', I can say that he doesn't appeal to me in the way he did when I was younger.

I do find it kind of comical that my worldview is so similar to that which is stressed in the books though-- Maybe for that reason, I find it rather boring now? :laughing:


----------



## Entropic

Word Dispenser said:


> Aah, I have the Terry Brooks series' in my library-- I actually prefer him to Eddings. I read the Landover series and the Running with the Demon series in particular, but I haven't _really _gotten into Shannara. I did play the computer game, though. It's on my reading list. The fact that I've _got _the oodles of Shannara books is testament to that. Just gotta pick 'em up. But, I'm a bit of a completionist, so I gotta finish Belgarath and Polgara first.
> 
> And I was thinking of reading some classic literature for awhile. But, _then _Shannara, for sure!
> 
> Re-reading the Eddings' books, I hadn't read them since I was 8 - 12, or something like that. I thought he was either an Si-Fe or an Si-Te, actually. But, it kind of makes sense that he'd be Alpha NT, maybe even Ne-dom, because the work is really disjointed. The idea of a 'Necessity' being the instrument of change in the books kind of seems like an Ne halfheartedly trying to find a way to make everything fit and tie together. Now that I've re-read the Belgariad, the Mallorean, and almost through 'Belgarath the Sorcerer', I can say that he doesn't appeal to me in the way he did when I was younger.
> 
> I do find it kind of comical that my worldview is so similar to that which is stressed in the books though-- Maybe for that reason, I find it rather boring now? :laughing:


Never read Landover because it was never published in Sweden, but I did read Running with the Demon. It's a great series and perhaps his best, actually. I really appreciated it. 

And yeah, I think Eddings appeals to a younger audience in general. I don't remember that it was disjointed but I felt that it began to become quite repetitive, the way he kept telling the story, over time (the same criticism applies to Pratchett, I think). It essentially was the same elements clad in new armor. Looks interesting at surface level, I suppose, but once you unveil what's underneath it's just air. Can't say it overly appeals to me. Other than that I don't read much anymore, let alone fantasy. Mostly because I find that the worlds I'm looking for are usually nowadays found in video games rather than books. 

Something like Bloodborne, it has an incredibly appealing approach and aesthetic. You just don't find that in fantasy, typically. Not quite that, and I'm not sure why, but maybe it's difficult to in a way, reproduce, that particular dark aesthetic.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Entropic said:


> Never read Landover because it was never published in Sweden, but I did read Running with the Demon. It's a great series and perhaps his best, actually. I really appreciated it.
> 
> And yeah, I think Eddings appeals to a younger audience in general. I don't remember that it was disjointed but I felt that it began to become quite repetitive, the way he kept telling the story, over time (the same criticism applies to Pratchett, I think). It essentially was the same elements clad in new armor. Looks interesting at surface level, I suppose, but once you unveil what's underneath it's just air. Can't say it overly appeals to me. Other than that I don't read much anymore, let alone fantasy. Mostly because I find that the worlds I'm looking for are usually nowadays found in video games rather than books.
> 
> Something like Bloodborne, it has an incredibly appealing approach and aesthetic. You just don't find that in fantasy, typically. Not quite that, and I'm not sure why, but maybe it's difficult to in a way, reproduce, that particular dark aesthetic.


Landover is a treat-- I recommend it. Doubtless you could order it online, as well. It's not as good as Running with the Demon though. I read that around 13, and need to reread it again as well (The series, I mean.).

And _yes _that's exactly the problem with Eddings-- He's _very _repetitive. He tends to reiterate a lot.

I've maybe not read enough Pratchett to see that side of it, but I find it refreshingly quirky, at least.

And I know what you mean, but I'm still a reader, when I'm not plugged in. I find video game stories to rival books, perhaps, but you don't need a plug for books, haha. I'm a big fan of the good ol' adventure point-and-clicks-- There are puzzles, and story. It's not so much the action that appeals to me, although action can be a fun filler. 'Specially when it's shiny. If you're ever in the market for playing old story games and don't care too much that it's old and not as graphically enhanced, I'd recommend Gabriel Knight for you in particular.

Only heard vague accounts of Bloodborne. Looks like I'll need to play that.

Games I'm playing lately.. The Secret World. It had some new expansions that I just went through. It's a truly awesome MMO. The community is pleasant, the world is intricately woven, the stories and characters are amazing.

Then there's Dreamfall Chapters. It's the third in a trilogy, and it's been a long time coming. The first two were The Longest Journey and Dreamfall: The Longest Journey. I think this trilogy is probably quite Ne.

I'm also playing Final Fantasy 13 and finding it... _Lame_. What is it about Final Fantasy and having to have a whiny brat as the main protagonist? I guess they want to appeal to the younger generations?

Still, I like the side characters. Not as much as those in Final Fantasy 10, or even 12. Auron was boss. Balthier and Fran rock. But, please kill Vaan, Tidus, and sure, even kill Squall. Who needs him anyway?

I dunno, there are so _many _games I've played. Oo, one I remember from a long time back-- Shadows of Destiny. That one was quirky and interesting. I bet it'd appeal to you. Kind of like the movie 'The Butterfly Effect', in a way, only a deity instead of odd time travel. And lots of alternate endings.

Also, watched some playthroughs of games. I like the Telltale games. I like that they're bringing back adventure games, even if it's too easy to play them now. :3 I miss those weird lateral-thinking puzzles that frustrated everyone.


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Soo, how you guys think that -Fe manifest in you ? I did relate to description but it bears a resemblence to 7 (maybe even 9 and 2) so I'm not sure what is what. I just assumed all people were like that.

:kitteh: SEI wannabe :kitteh:


----------



## MightyLizardKing

Some people say Alpha is the most annoying quadra. How does this make sense when we're perfect?


----------



## Word Dispenser

MightyLizardKing said:


> Some people say Alpha is the most annoying quadra. How does this make sense when we're perfect?


Someone actually _says _that?

Weird.

Maybe we're annoying 'cause we're lazy slobs who enjoy having fun over, or during hard work. :kitteh:


----------



## MightyLizardKing

Word Dispenser said:


> Someone actually _says _that?
> 
> Weird.
> 
> Maybe we're annoying 'cause we're lazy slobs who enjoy having fun over, or during hard work. :kitteh:


im feeling what ur putting down ... and it feels good

gammas dont like us cause theyre delusional and think they're gonna care about how other people see them after they croak. lol silly gammas


----------



## Word Dispenser

I'd like to take a moment to honour something which brings a lot of us Alphas together...

Sierra and Lucasarts adventure point-and-clicks.


----------



## The Exception

MightyLizardKing said:


> Some people say Alpha is the most annoying quadra. How does this make sense when we're perfect?


They're just jealous of us. :kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

Rather than being typed, it seems that when people put out a questionnaire, they just want reassurance and/or validation. :/

What I find that is rather unfortunate, is that they are often given just that, with very little basis or reasoning.

Every time I try to type people, this is what happens. I don't even know why I ever bothered typing people. I give up. 

No more!


----------



## Megane

Greetings Alpha quadra! New LII here.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Megane said:


> Greetings Alpha quadra! New LII here.


Wootwoot!


----------



## The Exception

Megane said:


> Greetings Alpha quadra! New LII here.


Welcome! erc3:


----------



## Jimmers

Hello, I am an LII, who has a strong Fi role function, so much so that I constantly flip between NT and some Fi dom. I've tended to go ESI over EII and I'm trying to figure out why. Maybe it is the similarities, like LII and ESI both being democratic and negativist. No, it is not because I am Fi. It is too complicated to explain. Anyways I'm going to try and interact on here to see how it goes.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Jimmers said:


> Hello, I am an LII, who has a strong Fi role function, so much so that I constantly flip between NT and some Fi dom. I've tended to go ESI over EII and I'm trying to figure out why. Maybe it is the similarities, like LII and ESI both being democratic and negativist. No, it is not because I am Fi. It is too complicated to explain. Anyways I'm going to try and interact on here to see how it goes.


Well, you just have to ask yourself... Which function do you _value_ more? Fi or Ti?

I don't see why certain functions can't surpass others-- 2 dimensional functions can even rival 3 dimensional functions, _especially _if we value them. 

But, Fi should _not _be competing with your Ti-- Ti is your worldview, and is one of your 4-dimensional functions. If anything competes with that, it'd _maybe _be Ni (Your other 4-dimensional function. But, you don't value it, so it'd be variable and wouldn't come into play as often.) 

There are no twin personalities-- Everyone within their type is an individual. But, we don't consciously turn on and off functions, either.

I think that it's much more helpful to think of the functions as something which we value and/or appreciate, rather than something we are skilled in, for that reason.

I might_ think _I'm quite skilled at Fe, but anybody who actually _knows_ me will tell you that it's _just _passable. It's probably a little better than my Se, which is also a 2 dimensional function, but I don't value it. There are probably a few people on these forums who might say that I'm an Alpha SF, because of how much I value and attempt to show Fe-- But, that falls flat when it comes to my Si. Si comes out in me, but it's a decidedly ill-used function, and only seems to shine with the encouragement of others who have stronger Si.

But, rambling aside: It would be highly unusual for a function which we _don't_ value to take precedence over one which we do, particularly our main focal point, the cream of our crop, our butter roll-- The worldview function.


----------



## Jimmers

Word Dispenser said:


> Well, you just have to ask yourself... Which function do you _value_ more? Fi or Ti?
> 
> I don't see why certain functions can't surpass others-- 2 dimensional functions can even rival 3 dimensional functions, _especially _if we value them.
> 
> But, Fi should _not _be competing with your Ti-- Ti is your worldview, and is one of your 4-dimensional functions. If anything competes with that, it'd _maybe _be Ni (Your other 4-dimensional function. But, you don't value it, so it'd be variable and wouldn't come into play as often.)
> 
> There are no twin personalities-- Everyone within their type is an individual. But, we don't consciously turn on and off functions, either.
> 
> I think that it's much more helpful to think of the functions as something which we value and/or appreciate, rather than something we are skilled in, for that reason.
> 
> I might_ think _I'm quite skilled at Fe, but anybody who actually _knows_ me will tell you that it's _just _passable. It's probably a little better than my Se, which is also a 2 dimensional function, but I don't value it. There are probably a few people on these forums who might say that I'm an Alpha SF, because of how much I value and attempt to show Fe-- But, that falls flat when it comes to my Si. Si comes out in me, but it's a decidedly ill-used function, and only seems to shine with the encouragement of others who have stronger Si.
> 
> But, rambling aside: It would be highly unusual for a function which we _don't_ value to take precedence over one which we do, particularly our main focal point, the cream of our crop, our butter roll-- The worldview function.


The conflict is more relational, like when someone expects me to use Fi when I want to do what makes the most sense, or when they think I am good at Fi and have certain expectations of me I would rather not have. The conflict is between base and role function, which makes me feel insecure. Internally, I want to use Ti, but sometimes my relations require different functions.


----------



## dbmorpher

Socionics makes a lot more sense and is more logical than Myers Briggs, I'm sticking with this. It also allows me to analyze relationships, like the super-ego one I am addicted to now.


----------



## HollyGolightly

Hi I am new to this subforum can I come and play?


----------



## Word Dispenser

@Sporadic Aura: Your birthday is today too!? Wootwoot.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Thanks have hearts now? Or did they always have hearts? Am I just _noticing _this_ *now*_?

Anyway... Have you ever listened to music and pretended that you were an alien species from another planet that had never heard music before, and was trying to figure it out?

Of course, there's a great deal of possibilities regarding how it would sound to you. 

Listening to classical that my husfiend had on, wondering which instrument the strings were (That rather bothered me a great deal, but I _think _they were cellos, it's just that they were brassy and softer than I normally associated with cello sounds.) 

And then thinking of each individual instrument as a foreign sound... It's all rather interesting. You should try it, sometime.

I have this compulsive tendency to count magpies wherever I go, now, because of the magpie counting rhyme. Have you heard of it?

_One for sorrow,
Two for joy,
Three for a girl,
Four for a boy,
Five for silver,
Six for gold,
Seven for a secret,
Never to be told._

It struck me that five should _not _be _silver_, but I don't know why, beyond the fact that it's not a particularly symmetrical number. It just seems as if the two numbers-- Five and six-- Should be switched. Don't you think?

But, regardless, the rhyme actually seems to be true, for some reason... Hm. And that maybe magpies rather like my company, in twos.

I'm working at a library now. I never would have thought it would suit me, since I'm not a particularly _organized _person, but... I have _never _felt as if I had belonged in any place more than this place. 

Filled to the brim with ideas, with possibilities and interests. So much _potential_... Bursting with it. Education.

I always thought of myself as being someone who should _probably _be an educator. A professorial-type position.

I suppose that it almost seems quite _obvious _now. That it should be a library. That it's some kind of 'calling', though I rather appall that idea, in a sense. In another, it's quite a comforting notion... Finally something that is constant, when I am so inconstant in other ways.

Books have always been such: An island of sorts, still and unmoving, in the center of the maelstrom of life.

And the people that I work with are so easy to speak to. They seem to _understand_. 

And if I were forced to convey _what _they understand, I'd probably say that they understand, among other things, the need to _know_. To figure things out. To look things up. To jump assiduously between interests, and through books. They don't even blink an eyelash when you take out 7 books for the month.

I like it there.

Also, my internal monologue is kind of British-sounding right now. Probably because I've been reading a lot of Neil Gaiman. So, sorry. It's rubbed off on me.


----------



## Recede

Word Dispenser said:


> Thanks have hearts now? Or did they always have hearts? Am I just _noticing _this_ *now*_?


It was always there but I did the same thing a while back. xD



> Anyway... Have you ever listened to music and pretended that you were an alien species from another planet that had never heard music before, and was trying to figure it out?


Not aliens, and I don't know about "trying to figure it out", but I have wondered what it would sound like to someone who had never heard music before. Or to animals. What is television like to cats and dogs? What does the English language sound like to non-native speakers? We're so used to it we barely even notice what it actually sounds like. Sometimes I like to detach from all meaning and just listen to the pure sound of it. Also, I've always thought British accents sound cool, but I've heard British people think American accents sound cool, which I think is interesting. 



> It struck me that five should _not _be _silver_, but I don't know why, beyond the fact that it's not a particularly symmetrical number. It just seems as if the two numbers-- Five and six-- Should be switched. Don't you think?


Is this perhaps the same type of thing as associating yellow folders with social studies classes and red folders with math classes?


----------



## Word Dispenser

Silveresque said:


> Not aliens, and I don't know about "trying to figure it out", but I have wondered what it would sound like to someone who had never heard music before. Or to animals. What is television like to cats and dogs? What does the English language sound like to non-native speakers? We're so used to it we barely even notice what it actually sounds like. Sometimes I like to detach from all meaning and just listen to the pure sound of it. Also, I've always thought British accents sound cool, but I've heard British people think American accents sound cool, which I think is interesting.


Yes-- Exactly. To detach from the sounds and think of them in a really 'meditative' way, I guess. Seems kind of zen. To remove yourself, you kinda have to remove thought, in a way.

Most of Europe thinks that America is cool. Particularly Hollywood. But, the result of that is a bastardization of American traditions. Like, because of what you see on TV and movies, in Europe there's a lot of egging houses and toilet papering of houses and crap like that when kids don't get candy on Halloween, and I noticed that happens a lot less often in North America. XD



> Is this perhaps the same type of thing as associating yellow folders with social studies classes and red folders with math classes?


I haven't had _that _remarkable experience. I think it's just because I prefer silver to gold. Six for silver, five for gold. Just _seems _right. Fits better. Doesn't necessarily make sense, though. :laughing:


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Word Dispenser said:


> Thanks have hearts now? Or did they always have hearts? Am I just _noticing _this_ *now*_?
> 
> Anyway... Have you ever listened to music and pretended that you were an alien species from another planet that had never heard music before, and was trying to figure it out?


I sometimes imagine meeting an alien and showing it to them. >_>

("sometimes")


----------



## Mr inappropriate

I think I always wanted a friend group of like minded people to spend time and have fun. I think thats why i like perC and most people here. We share an interest in typology (albeit im less serious bout theory). I dont know if its because im really sei or just my enneagram in works. anyway hi again :3


----------



## Mr inappropriate

I feel so alone :'(

Im gonna eat all them cupcakes on my own since noone around to share. Then i will get fat. :"(


----------



## Word Dispenser

crashbandicoot said:


> I feel so alone :'(
> 
> Im gonna eat all them cupcakes on my own since noone around to share. Then i will get fat. :"(


Did someone say _cheesecake_?

No?

Damn.


----------



## Recede

I think I defy nearly every alpha and SEI stereotype. I think people and descriptions tend to paint these pictures of Si types as extreme comfort seekers who like to wrap themselves in warm blankets and sip hot chocolate on a cold evening while listening to soft music with the lighting of the room just right to create a pleasant atmosphere. And honestly that sounds like a pointless activity to me. Drinking hot chocolate? Sure. But why go through the effort of doing all that atmosphere stuff? Why not just drink the hot chocolate? I'd rather focus on one thing at a time anyways. 

And I don't care if things are messy or don't look nice, not everything must be beautiful. My room is perpetually somewhat messy, and rather plain because I never bothered to do much to make it look nice. So no, I'm not beauty seeking either. I can appreciate things that look nice, like a beautiful sunset, but I don't really seek to create such things in my environment. 

Part of it is that I'm really not very pleasure-seeking at all. I'd say rather than comfort or enjoyment or beauty, I tend to seek ease and simplicity. I don't know, maybe that's more what Si is actually about anyways. 

A lot of my focus is on very short term forecasting (the next 1-10 days or so), and I have a feeling of how heavy or light these coming days will be. If I have a lot of homework to do the next day, I'll feel the heaviness and dread having to do that. I do planning to try to avoid having too much to do at once, so my schedule won't feel so heavy.

And another thing, most sensory pleasures don't do much for me because they are brief. I don't care much to see movies. Or get a massage. Or any other isolated, one time pleasures. They don't do much for me unless they are ongoing states or environments. That's probably why I like mmorpgs, because I can keep going into that environment. Because Si is not just in the present but in the forecast. It needs to see tangible evidence of an ongoing process that gives the near future a sense of ease and simplicity. I haven't seen this in descriptions, but I think this is what's really behind the whole notion of Si seeking stability and neglecting new experiences.


----------



## aendern

Silveresque said:


> I think I defy nearly every alpha and SEI stereotype. I think people and descriptions tend to paint these pictures of Si types as extreme comfort seekers who like to wrap themselves in warm blankets and sip hot chocolate on a cold evening while listening to soft music with the lighting of the room just right to create a pleasant atmosphere. And honestly that sounds like a pointless activity to me. Drinking hot chocolate? Sure. *But why go through the effort of doing all that atmosphere stuff?* *Why not just drink the hot chocolate? I'd rather focus on one thing at a time anyways. *


You sound _*nothing*_ like an Alpha. 








Alphas *love *that "pointless activity" that you describe it as. 




> And I don't care if things are messy or don't look nice, not everything must be beautiful. My room is perpetually somewhat messy, and rather plain because I never bothered to do much to make it look nice. So no, I'm not beauty seeking either. I can appreciate things that look nice, like a beautiful sunset, but I don't really seek to create such things in my environment.


I have no clue why you think you're an SEI.... you're clearly not.



> Part of it is that I'm really not very pleasure-seeking at all. I'd say rather than comfort or enjoyment or beauty, I tend to seek *ease and simplicity*. I don't know, maybe that's more what Si is actually about anyways.


That seems more Delta.


Would like to know your thoughts.


Burr is by no means an outlier. There are thousands of other Alpha YouTubers who eat that kind of shit up. They love it so much.


You CLEARLY disvalue it.

edit:

My absolute favorite:






Gigi is a total charicature of ESFJ Alpha.






^^ Really great example as well. Lots of that "pointless activity" that you speak against.


----------



## Recede

@_emberfly_ 

I don't fit the stereotypes but there's really no other type I could be. Si base, Ip temperament, and 2D valued Ti have been clearly established in my type thread and across time. Te PoLR also fits. It's like if reality doesn't exactly match the objective criteria for a label, I can't for the life of me decide whether it fits. It's not just the case with typing, but any similar type of situation. 

I think it really just needs to be accepted that type is not a portrait, that it's going to show differently in each individual.


----------



## aendern

Silveresque said:


> I don't fit the stereotypes but there's really no other type I could be. Si base, Ip temperament, and 2D valued Ti have been clearly established in my type thread and across time. Te PoLR also fits. It's like if reality doesn't exactly match the objective criteria for a label, I can't for the life of me decide whether it fits. It's not just the case with typing, but any similar type of situation.
> 
> I think it really just needs to be accepted that type is not a portrait, that it's going to show differently in each individual.


Yes. I thought Gulenko's deliniation of the information elements into + and - was a great step forward in helping to clarify how the elements manifest differently for each quadra.

The reason I'm most confused is that you seem to reject the Alpha version of Si (at least as it is defined by Viktor Gulenko).

Although, of course, there is a reason that Gulenko's model is not the most popular one . . . 

I tend to quite agree with Viktor's model because it seems hugely accurate and in accordance with the real world and self-evident phenomena. You would be the first contradiction of it that I have seen if you really are an SEI.

How do you see Si manifesting for yourself? As an Si dom, I would think you would see it a lot . . . ? So how do you see Si affecting and dictating your life?


----------



## Recede

emberfly said:


> Yes. I thought Gulenko's deliniation of the information elements into + and - was a great step forward in helping to clarify how the elements manifest differently for each quadra.


Are you sure that's the right link? I didn't see anything about +/- there. 



> The reason I'm most confused is that you seem to reject the Alpha version of Si (at least as it is defined by Viktor Gulenko).
> 
> Although, of course, there is a reason that Gulenko's model is not the most popular one . . .
> 
> I tend to quite agree with Viktor's model because it seems hugely accurate and in accordance with the real world and self-evident phenomena. You would be the first contradiction of it that I have seen if you really are an SEI.


I don't know, to be honest I haven't really been able to figure out the +/- model. Either I'm not understanding it correctly, or it isn't accurate for me. But I suppose it could simply be that I'm not very pleasure seeking in general, which itself isn't type related but makes +Si less relatable, the way it's described. 



> How do you see Si manifesting for yourself? As an Si dom, I would think you would see it a lot . . . ? So how do you see Si affecting and dictating your life?


I actually can't really see my Si. It's like it mostly only shows in the big picture. Ip temperament + dynamic + irrational + sensation. Maybe that's all there is to it, and the rest is always changing. There is no portrait, only a frame.


----------



## To_august

emberfly said:


> Alphas *love that "pointless activity" that you describe it as.
> *


Now I feel jealous of people who have so much patience and time so as to make this^ their _daily _morning routine. I'm like - wake up and in 20 minutes already ride the subway to work half-asleep. Lol.


----------



## aendern

Silveresque said:


> Are you sure that's the right link? I didn't see anything about +/- there.


No, that wasn't it at all :laughing:
Socionics - the16types.info - plus/minus by Victor Gulenko



> I don't know, to be honest I haven't really been able to figure out the +/- model. Either I'm not understanding it correctly, or it isn't accurate for me. But I suppose it could simply be that I'm not very pleasure seeking in general, which itself isn't type related but makes +Si less relatable, the way it's described.


Does it not seem type related in Socionics? I get why you would say it's not type related in MBTI (because it isn't), but in Socionics they seem to emphasize comfort or pleasure seeking (or discomfort and displeasure minimization for delta) for Si. 




> I actually can't really see my Si. It's like it mostly only shows in the big picture. Ip temperament + dynamic + irrational + sensation. Maybe that's all there is to it, and the rest is always changing. There is no portrait, only a frame.


Yeah I read a few of your questionnaires. You definitely did seem IP, but I didn't see a strong Si preference, either. Certainly nothing that would make me think you were _dominant_ in Si. 

Maybe you're just divergent :happy: I'll leave you alone.


----------



## Jeremy8419

@Silveresque about 3rd time trying to post this dur to cell reception lol

"Si base, Ip temperament, and 2D valued Ti"
First two are also SLI. Third may be due to:
"Te PoLR also fits"
Which is also dependent upon source. Some describe it as people expressing onto the person's polr to alter the person's perception. This is Fe PoLR. Fe PoLR may expressive themselves, but when others try and express onto the Fe polr or alter the Fe polr individual's expressions, it does not work well. This paragraph is also an example of such, as it would appear to be trying to alter your Fe.

PoLR is weak, unvalued, and a stressor/nuissance. It is a kill switch. If you continue to press it off/on or push too hard, short-circuiting/breaking ensues.

I was having a long ongoing discussion with you in your thread. In my last post, I purposely hit the Fe PoLR button, and conversation ended.

It's your life. Be whoever you want to be and express yourself as you see fit. The questions I asked you in my last post, you could ask yourself in private. It's no one else's business how you feel other than yourself, anyways.

"I think it really just needs to be accepted that type is not a portrait, that it's going to show differently in each individual."
Of course. Its just a generality. Since I was already talking about it, take a look at SLI DCNH subtypes... Very varied within the SLI type.


----------



## Recede

Jeremy8419 said:


> @_Silveresque_ about 3rd time trying to post this dur to cell reception lol
> 
> "Si base, Ip temperament, and 2D valued Ti"
> First two are also SLI. Third may be due to:
> "Te PoLR also fits"
> Which is also dependent upon source. Some describe it as people expressing onto the person's polr to alter the person's perception. This is Fe PoLR. Fe PoLR may expressive themselves, but when others try and express onto the Fe polr or alter the Fe polr individual's expressions, it does not work well. This paragraph is also an example of such, as it would appear to be trying to alter your Fe.
> 
> PoLR is weak, unvalued, and a stressor/nuissance. It is a kill switch. If you continue to press it off/on or push too hard, short-circuiting/breaking ensues.
> 
> I was having a long ongoing discussion with you in your thread. In my last post, I purposely hit the Fe PoLR button, and conversation ended.
> 
> It's your life. Be whoever you want to be and express yourself as you see fit. The questions I asked you in my last post, you could ask yourself in private. It's no one else's business how you feel other than yourself, anyways.
> 
> "I think it really just needs to be accepted that type is not a portrait, that it's going to show differently in each individual."
> Of course. Its just a generality. Since I was already talking about it, take a look at SLI DCNH subtypes... Very varied within the SLI type.


I'm not sure how it's Fe PoLR? I mean, objective criteria and definitions for typing, diagnosing, classifying, etc. Seems clearly Te, or at least Thinking in general. Thinking tells us what it is. 

I've actually been meaning to get around to your post but I've been excessively exhausted from insomnia (due to physical pain) and distracted by other threads. It wasn't anything you said that made me not answer. I'll try to respond soon.


----------



## Recede

emberfly said:


> Does it not seem type related in Socionics? I get why you would say it's not type related in MBTI (because it isn't), but in Socionics they seem to emphasize comfort or pleasure seeking (or discomfort and displeasure minimization for delta) for Si.


I'm quite sure that it's not type related. Any type can be pleasure seeking or not, and it's just that Si alphas who are pleasure seeking will seek Si pleasures. The tendencies to seek pleasure or avoid pain are probably more related to enneagram, personality, culture or upbringing, psychological state, or situational factors.



> Yeah I read a few of your questionnaires. You definitely did seem IP, but I didn't see a strong Si preference, either. Certainly nothing that would make me think you were _dominant_ in Si.


Well, I don't seem to be dominant in anything else. :kitteh:


----------



## Jeremy8419

Silveresque said:


> I'm not sure how it's Fe PoLR? I mean, objective criteria and definitions for typing, diagnosing, classifying, etc. Seems clearly Te, or at least Thinking in general. Thinking tells us what it is.
> 
> I've actually been meaning to get around to your post but I've been excessively exhausted from insomnia (due to physical pain) and distracted by other threads. It wasn't anything you said that made me not answer. I'll try to respond soon.


Placing objects together as objects is Ti. Placing them together as fields is Fi.

Going back to Te PoLR (as you've read) vs Fe PoLR. Te polr is weak to people saying their knowledge is weak, efficiency low, management of resources poor, not doing things the right way. Part of shat you read said inability to accurately judge 3rd party information. Yes, validity could be part of it. However, valid to what? And someone giving you information to what end? Example: Stranger tells you that Computer Chip X just came out, and it has Y and Z properties, making it X% better than your old one. Pretty simple right? Guy clearly wants you to buy it, but objectively, it's worth it. Next situation: Guy on forums comes on and starts telling you about how MisterP is incorrect and that what you feel towards your type is mistaken and that you are really X and doesn't that seem more right to you? This is unverifiable information requiring you to know your feelings for it, and the speaker is very much trying to change your expressions from skeptic to happy.

It's not a matter of objective data, as only you feel as you feel. They may be able to determine your emotions, but you cannot accept their emotional pressure, nor very well determine your own to know if what they suggest is actually how your internal dynamics are.

Note your avatar, your profile picture, all your writing. No emotional displays. Could there be? Sure. Just go see what the INFP and ENFP forums look like. Is there anything "wrong" with this? No. Of course not.

Point is, you are saying your PoLR is because you can't decide on objective verifiability. However, your emotions and essence are not verifiable, which is what typing via means such as this forum are trying to do.


----------



## Recede

Jeremy8419 said:


> Placing objects together as objects is Ti. Placing them together as fields is Fi.
> 
> Going back to Te PoLR (as you've read) vs Fe PoLR. Te polr is weak to people saying their knowledge is weak, efficiency low, management of resources poor, not doing things the right way. Part of shat you read said inability to accurately judge 3rd party information. Yes, validity could be part of it. However, valid to what? And someone giving you information to what end? Example: Stranger tells you that Computer Chip X just came out, and it has Y and Z properties, making it X% better than your old one. Pretty simple right? Guy clearly wants you to buy it, but objectively, it's worth it. Next situation: Guy on forums comes on and starts telling you about how MisterP is incorrect and that what you feel towards your type is mistaken and that you are really X and doesn't that seem more right to you? This is unverifiable information requiring you to know your feelings for it, and the speaker is very much trying to change your expressions from skeptic to happy.
> 
> It's not a matter of objective data, as only you feel as you feel. They may be able to determine your emotions, but you cannot accept their emotional pressure, nor very well determine your own to know if what they suggest is actually how your internal dynamics are.
> 
> Note your avatar, your profile picture, all your writing. No emotional displays. Could there be? Sure. Just go see what the INFP and ENFP forums look like. Is there anything "wrong" with this? No. Of course not.
> 
> Point is, you are saying your PoLR is because you can't decide on objective verifiability. However, your emotions and essence are not verifiable, which is what typing via means such as this forum are trying to do.


What emotional pressure? What are you even talking about? None of this has anything to do with the reason I gave for Te PoLR. I'm talking about difficulties comparing objective information (in general and not related to emotions) with objective criteria (also has nothing to do with emotions) and having difficulty determining what to call it when they don't exactly match. I said that this includes all situations of this type and not just typing myself. Types strong in Te don't seem to have this problem.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Silveresque said:


> What emotional pressure? What are you even talking about? None of this has anything to do with the reason I gave for Te PoLR. I'm talking about difficulties comparing objective information (in general and not related to emotions) with objective criteria (also has nothing to do with emotions) and having difficulty determining what to call it when they don't exactly match. I said that this includes all situations of this type and not just typing myself. Types strong in Te don't seem to have this problem.


That would be Ti.


----------



## Recede

Jeremy8419 said:


> That would be Ti.


I don't agree but either way, it's weak logic suggesting ethical ego.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Silveresque said:


> I don't agree but either way, it's weak logic suggesting ethical ego.


You're talking about structural logic and classification. It's part of the definition of Ti.

Super-ego Ti does suggest ethics ego. However, unvalued Ti is opposed by valued Fi. Fi over Ti/Fe and that conflict is gamma/delta. Would you consider placing your internals vs model a internals to be Thinking?


----------



## Recede

Jeremy8419 said:


> You're talking about structural logic and classification. It's part of the definition of Ti.
> 
> Super-ego Ti does suggest ethics ego. However, unvalued Ti is opposed by valued Fi. Fi over Ti/Fe and that conflict is gamma/delta. Would you consider placing your internals vs model a internals to be Thinking?


I'm not sure what you're asking. What internals? And why do you think I'm Fi valuing?


----------



## Jeremy8419

Silveresque said:


> I'm not sure what you're asking. What internals? And why do you think I'm Fi valuing?



You said you based tour PoLR upon structuring, ordering, arranging, and classifying objects, which is Ti. Which means you accept having unvalued Ti. If you have unvalued Ti, then Fi must be valued.

Your internals; your emotions, thoughts, preferences, attention to various aspects of reality, way your cognitive process works, etc. This compared to the internals of the 16 socionics types' models; i.e., Ne in this function, Se here, blah here, etc. Placing the internals of one field together with the internals of another, to determine which one you fit with best. What would you call this?


----------



## Recede

Jeremy8419 said:


> You said you based tour PoLR upon structuring, ordering, arranging, and classifying objects, which is Ti. Which means you accept having unvalued Ti. If you have unvalued Ti, then Fi must be valued.


And what if I don't have any personal values and find such things pointless? What if how I feel about people or things is almost never personal, and I never experience strong like or dislike? I can never say that I hate something because it's never true. 



> Your internals; your emotions, thoughts, preferences, attention to various aspects of reality, way your cognitive process works, etc. This compared to the internals of the 16 socionics types' models; i.e., Ne in this function, Se here, blah here, etc. Placing the internals of one field together with the internals of another, to determine which one you fit with best. What would you call this?


I'd call it "Your internals; your emotions, thoughts, preferences, attention to various aspects of reality, way your cognitive process works, etc. This compared to the internals of the 16 socionics types' models; i.e., Ne in this function, Se here, blah here, etc. Placing the internals of one field together with the internals of another, to determine which one you fit with best." :kitteh:


----------



## Jeremy8419

Silveresque said:


> And what if I don't have any personal values and find such things pointless? What if how I feel about people or things is almost never personal, and I never experience strong like or dislike? I can never say that I hate something because it's never true.


Externally evident by what? No emotions towards them? All the elements present themselves differently depending on the individuals strength in them and dimensionality. Fe is emotional expression, as written on wikisocion: Laughing, smiling, dancing, etc., all forms of emotional displays and emotional affect on others. Fi is more akin to the opposite aspect of "love" and "relations;" it is the unseen underlying connections with people, your understanding of how you each think about each other, the psychological distance. You must value one of these two things.





> I'd call it "Your internals; your emotions, thoughts, preferences, attention to various aspects of reality, way your cognitive process works, etc. This compared to the internals of the 16 socionics types' models; i.e., Ne in this function, Se here, blah here, etc. Placing the internals of one field together with the internals of another, to determine which one you fit with best." :kitteh:


Internal Statics of Fields; Fi. All those things about you are the internals of you (an object). Viewing such is Ne. Placing you together with others and with Socionics as whole objects is external statics of fields. When you say, forget the explicit/verifiable, and seek to place your field of objects (what is viewed by Ne) together with the internals of the various types' function stacks, you have Fi.

Ti places together objects. Fi places together fields. They are direct opposites. You can be valued/strong in one and unvalued/strong in the other, or you can be valued/weak in one and unvalued/weak in the other. If you understand these two opposing forces now, placing things together explicitly/verifiably (Ti) and placing things together implicitly/unverifiable (Fi), then can you now determine which of these two things you like, and which you dislike?


----------



## Recede

@Jeremy8419

I'm moving this discussion to my type thread.


----------



## To_august

crashbandicoot said:


> himm, it still involves treasure. :friendly_wink:
> 
> I just started watching "relic hunter" which used to be my favorite thing on TV as a child. I'm so pumped up for treasure burying :kitteh::tongue:


It was more like... a game of burying treasures that aren't meant to be found XD

Dunno if there is a complete English equivalent for this game (I'd be interested to know if there is one), but the gist of the game is to find some "treasure" (this can be anything - wrapping paper, twigs, flowers, anything small enough) and a splinter of glass. Then you have to dig a little hole in the ground, put you "treasure" in the hole (you can make any fancy, good-looking composition from the things you have), cover it with a splinter of glass and safely cover it all up with ground. Afterwords you can return to this place and, by uncovering the ground a bit, observe your creation through the glass, or make display of it to your friends if you want, which is like a sign of trust or something.

Relic Hunter! Oh my, it's been so long since I saw it been mentioned.
I always loved all the archaeology and ancient-secrets-digging related movies. Especially Egyptian-themed ones. Both "Mummies" (I don't even count the third installment, since it's too much apart from the original concept) and "Stargate" are my favourites for that matter.:kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

I was more into Hercules and Xena at that time. Maybe a bit before. Then there was Cleopatra 2525, and Jack of All Trades. :kitteh:


----------



## The_Wanderer

Jeremy8419 said:


> <-that's a question, mi habigo.


It might be a question, but you're still not an EII.

It would be enlightening to see consensus on your claim that I am an ILE, however... So Alphas, am I one of you?


----------



## Mr inappropriate

To_august said:


> It was more like... a game of burying treasures that aren't meant to be found XD
> 
> Dunno if there is a complete English equivalent for this game (I'd be interested to know if there is one), but the gist of the game is to find some "treasure" (this can be anything - wrapping paper, twigs, flowers, anything small enough) and a splinter of glass. Then you have to dig a little hole in the ground, put you "treasure" in the hole (you can make any fancy, good-looking composition from the things you have), cover it with a splinter of glass and safely cover it all up with ground. Afterwords you can return to this place and, by uncovering the ground a bit, observe your creation through the glass, or make display of it to your friends if you want, which is like a sign of trust or something.
> 
> Relic Hunter! Oh my, it's been so long since I saw it been mentioned.
> I always loved all the archaeology and ancient-secrets-digging related movies. Especially Egyptian-themed ones. Both "Mummies" (I don't even count the third installment, since it's too much apart from the original concept) and "Stargate" are my favourites for that matter.:kitteh:


 :hypnotysed:

That sounds interesting. Its like an underground museum. We can even make our own experiments on decompostion of different materials.

Haha, yeah right ? I loved those type of series. Tomb Raider games, even if I couldnt complete any mission (puzzles were too hard for me at that time). I even wanted to become an archeologist at some point. 

Xena was cool, too but I was afraid of her, lol. :nightmare:
I cant remember Hercules.


----------



## VinnieBob

Jack of All Trades. :kitteh:[/QUOTE]

wasn't bruce campbell in that?


----------



## Word Dispenser

Vinniebob said:


> Jack of All Trades. :kitteh:


wasn't bruce campbell in that?[/QUOTE]

Ofc. I thought he was epic even before I saw Evil Dead, to be honest. He was also in Hercules and Xena as the Prince of Thieves. :kitteh:


----------



## VinnieBob

Word Dispenser said:


> wasn't bruce campbell in that?


Ofc. I thought he was epic even before I saw Evil Dead, to be honest. He was also in Hercules and Xena as the Prince of Thieves. :kitteh:[/QUOTE]

i loooove bruce campbell
have you seen bubba ho tep
his best movie ever


----------



## Word Dispenser

Vinniebob said:


> i loooove bruce campbell
> have you seen bubba ho tep
> his best movie ever


No I haven't, but now it's on my list.


----------



## VinnieBob

Word Dispenser said:


> No I haven't, but now it's on my list.


bruce plays elvis
and ozzie davis is J.F.K.
both are in a nursing home battling a egyptian mummy
sam raimi directs


----------



## To_august

Oh, yeah, loved Xena too. Around the same time I've been into Lost World series.

I recall Hercules been on TV, but I never could catch up with the series, since they've been shown at school-hours. Ah, non-internet times when show schedule mattered.


----------



## Mr inappropriate

To_august said:


> Oh, yeah, loved Xena too. Around the same time I've been into Lost World series.
> 
> I recall Hercules been on TV, but I never could catch up with the series, since they've been shown at school-hours. Ah, non-internet times when show schedule mattered.


Haha ikr ? Its crazy how everything has changed due to internet. 
Or are we becoming old ? :crying:


----------



## Word Dispenser

To_august said:


> Oh, yeah, loved Xena too. Around the same time I've been into Lost World series.
> 
> I recall Hercules been on TV, but I never could catch up with the series, since they've been shown at school-hours. Ah, non-internet times when show schedule mattered.


Ah yeah, Lost World! I remember that show! :kitteh:


----------



## Jeremy8419

The_Wanderer said:


> It might be a question, but you're still not an EII.
> 
> It would be enlightening to see consensus on your claim that I am an ILE, however... So Alphas, am I one of you?


/high-five! We are Jedi-Mind hack masterrrrrs!


----------



## Word Dispenser

The_Wanderer said:


> So Alphas, am I one of you?


Have Alphas ever been a group that isn't welcoming of others? You are automatically one of us just by hanging out here. :laughing:

As for your _cognition_, well. I dunno. I haven't really been in a position to analyze it. But, I'll take your word for it that you're an SEE. :kitteh:

You _do _seem to be a lot more abrupt in manner than an ILE would be. Heck, _any _Alpha would be, maybe! We don't mince words in the Alpha Quadra!

Still, that may not be any indication... It's just a small thing I've noticed.


----------



## The_Wanderer

I don't see myself as an Alpha, as a quadra it's perhaps the one I least see myself in. @_Jeremy8419_ does think that I am his supervisee, though (and implies that I am mistyped). But the Jury is still out on whether he's just a very dedicated troll or not.



Word Dispenser said:


> You _do _seem to be a lot more abrupt in manner than an ILE would be. Heck, _any _Alpha would be, maybe!


Maybe! lol.


----------



## Word Dispenser

The_Wanderer said:


> I don't see myself as an Alpha, as a quadra it's perhaps the one I least see myself in. @_Jeremy8419_ does think that I am his supervisee, though (and implies that I am mistyped). But the Jury is still out on whether he's just a very dedicated troll or not.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe! lol.


I dunno, I don't think he's a troll. Some of the stuff he has said about cognition makes sense, to me at least. :kitteh:


----------



## Jeremy8419

The_Wanderer said:


> I don't see myself as an Alpha, as a quadra it's perhaps the one I least see myself in. @_Jeremy8419_ does think that I am his supervisee, though (and implies that I am mistyped). But the Jury is still out on whether he's just a very dedicated troll or not.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe! lol.


The personality types are not personality types. They are questions and answers. They exist process sub-routines of the same question, which is also an answer. They are all the same questions and all the same answers. They merely are processing different information of them. The "enemy" does not exist. The "friend" does not exist. They are representations of the fact that there is an answer... And a question.


----------



## Entropic

Word Dispenser said:


> I dunno, I don't think he's a troll. Some of the stuff he has said about cognition makes sense, to me at least. :kitteh:


To be fair, a person isn't less a troll just because they attempt to come across as credible, which many trolls do, anyway.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Entropic said:


> To be fair, a person isn't less a troll just because they attempt to come across as credible, which many trolls do, anyway.


Sorry for being mean to you.


----------



## Serpent

I have a dream that one day I'll understand what @Jeremy8419 is saying.


----------



## To_august

ILE who's not found yet their SEI?:kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

To_august said:


> ILE who's not found yet their SEI?:kitteh:


What'cha talkin' about? You blind? SEI is _right there. _:kitteh:

Honestly though, as the honorary ILE to which all ILEs refer, I must be a poor example of one if I can't build myself a steampunky device to do my chores for me and fetch me my coffee and jammed toast.

Le sigh. :kitteh:

Although, to be fair to myself, I haven't really tried to _learn _engineering _or _robotics... Yet. 

Hmmm...


----------



## zinnia

Crap. I want a machine to do my chores for me. Alpha's got the cool stuff.

I am teh sads :'(


----------



## Typhon

Its better to have other humans do your chores for you.


----------



## Word Dispenser

Typhon said:


> Its better to have other humans do your chores for you.


Nah, that comes with emotional baggage and possibly strings attached.

Robots all the way! :kitteh:


----------



## Typhon

Word Dispenser said:


> Nah, that comes with emotional baggage and possibly strings attached.
> 
> Robots all the way! :kitteh:


Are you contradicting me?:tongue:


----------



## Word Dispenser

Typhon said:


> Are you contradicting me?:tongue:


Of course. :kitteh:


----------



## Word Dispenser

"Certainly intelligent enough to be an NT."

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


----------



## Typhon

Word Dispenser said:


> "Certainly intelligent enough to be an NT."
> 
> AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


These are ravings.

Just kidding.

But I don't know what you're talking about.:sad:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Typhon said:


> These are ravings.
> 
> Just kidding.
> 
> But I don't know what you're talking about.:sad:


She talking bout me erc2::rockon::smug:


----------



## Typhon

crashbandicoot said:


> She talking bout me erc2::rockon::smug:



Are you the new Hugh Hefner of the 2015? :crazy:


----------



## Word Dispenser

Typhon said:


> These are ravings.
> 
> Just kidding.
> 
> But I don't know what you're talking about.:sad:


Well, they kinda are anyway.

Just me complaining that someone is attaching 'intelligence' to all NTs, as if that were a fact. :kitteh:

They do it all the time in the personality typing area of the forums. I don't know how I end up over there, but it always grinds my gears.


----------



## Typhon

Word Dispenser said:


> Well, they kinda are anyway.
> 
> Just me complaining that someone is attaching 'intelligence' to all NTs, as if that were a fact. :kitteh:
> 
> They do it all the time in the personality typing area of the forums. I don't know how I end up over there, but it always grinds my gears.


Oh, I get it now, lol. 

Yeah, its a stereotype. Any type can be dumb or smart, anyways, NTs probably have more confidence in their intellectual capacities and thus project an intellectual quality onto others. But that doesn't make them more smart, just more confident. :kitteh:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Typhon said:


> Are you the new Hugh Hefner of the 2015? :crazy:


nope. maybe of 2016 :happy: if I get really lucky, that is.


----------



## Typhon

crashbandicoot said:


> nope. maybe of 2016 :happy: if I get really lucky, that is.


Haha.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Honestly, I don't think most people have reconciled I.Q. with behaviors of people in real life, let alone in regards to typology. People I know irl usually assume I am a thinking type (they don't know what this is, but they do this anyways) due to my intelligence. I usually tell them that sciences and math are my weakest subjects, which they fail to comprehend. They simply see someone highly intelligent and assume this must be my strong point. Eventually, if they get to know me well enough, they realize the liberal arts and humanities are my actual strong subjects, which just confuses them further lol.

Especially on here, I find most people unable to reconcile intelligence with personality typing. I.Q. only measures one type of intelligence. I fail to see why others are so quick to assume that a displayed I.Q. is indicative of any type. Knowing a person's type and their I.Q. may help determine their total intelligence, but it is ridiculous to try and go from I.Q. to personality type. I know INFJs that are dumb as a rock, and they are very different than INFJs of moderate intelligence, as are those different from those of high intelligence. Especially on these forums, I find it offensive when people assume that to be an INFJ that I must be on borderline suicide watch, engrossed in weird philosophical ideas that sound like a dimwitted highschooler read Plato, and live in a shoebox with my gaming PC.

Anywayyyys...
Here's a link for a relevant article lol
Going to have to put it into google translate yourself though
Socionics, Types of Intelligence and Their Measuring (PDF Download Available)


----------



## d e c a d e n t

@_Jeremy8419_
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't personally think you're a Thinking type because I find you to be _too intelligent​_.


----------



## To_august

Word Dispenser said:


> Well, they kinda are anyway.
> 
> Just me complaining that someone is attaching 'intelligence' to all NTs, as if that were a fact. :kitteh:
> 
> They do it all the time in the personality typing area of the forums. I don't know how I end up over there, but it always grinds my gears.


Ugh. That's the reason why I quitted visiting MBTI land. 

I only blame my curiosity and, as it appears, groundless hopes that something has changed in there for my occasional browsing of Keirsey subforums. Yesterday I stumbled upon "You Know you're Surrounded by Sensors When" in the INTP subforum and one of the most liked posts was about how intuitives can get along with sensors only by pretending they enjoy shallow sensor conversations and fooling them into believing that they are one of them. While internally they all cringe and curse sensors for not knowing who intuitives really are, how they are worlds apart and just being around sensors drains energy from intuitives.:frustrating:


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> @_Jeremy8419_
> Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't personally think you're a Thinking type because I find you to be _too intelligent​_.


You're funny lol


----------



## Word Dispenser

To_august said:


> Ugh. That's the reason why I quitted visiting MBTI land.
> 
> I only blame my curiosity and, as it appears, groundless hopes that something has changed in there for my occasional browsing of Keirsey subforums. Yesterday I stumbled upon "You Know you're Surrounded by Sensors When" in the INTP subforum and one of the most liked posts was about how intuitives can get along with sensors only by pretending they enjoy shallow sensor conversations and fooling them into believing that they are one of them. While internally they all cringe and curse sensors for not knowing who intuitives really are, how they are worlds apart and just being around sensors drains energy from intuitives.:frustrating:


I'm exactly the same! 

Omg, kindred spirits, To_august <3.. I heart you.

I can't believe what a bunch of bigots people can be when they're ignorant and suggested by misinformation, lol. I keep forgetting and going back, hoping they've changed even a little.

"You know you're surrounded..." thing is just so typical of this rampant attitude, and I have to force myself every time to walk away.. Just.. Walk away, WD.. It's not worth it. :laughing:


----------



## To_august

Word Dispenser said:


> I'm exactly the same!
> 
> Omg, kindred spirits, To_august <3.. I heart you.
> 
> I can't believe what a bunch of bigots people can be when they're ignorant and suggested by misinformation, lol. I keep forgetting and going back, hoping they've changed even a little.
> 
> "You know you're surrounded..." thing is just so typical of this rampant attitude, and I have to force myself every time to walk away.. Just.. Walk away, WD.. It's not worth it. :laughing:


It's reciprocated:love_heart:


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> You're funny lol


Just saying, in case you thought I might be skeptical of your self-typing as a feeler because I'm so impressed by your logic or something.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> Just saying, in case you thought I might be skeptical of your self-typing as a feeler because I'm so impressed by your logic or something.


You're goofy lol


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> You're goofy lol


Well, I don't want there to be any misunderstandings like that.

And I would say you're pretty goofy too, but perhaps that's your intent.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> Well, I don't want there to be any misunderstandings like that.
> 
> And I would say you're pretty goofy too, but perhaps that's your intent.


Your last two posts gave away your type lol


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> Your last two posts gave away your type lol


Is that so


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> Is that so


Yup. It's my secret, though. Ima keep it in my pocket... With my bag of lucky charms and my acorn husk. (if you put the husk between your thumbs and blow across the edge, it makes a loud whistle)


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> (if you put the husk between your thumbs and blow across the edge, it makes a loud whistle)


This is what I was really dying to know, so now I can have some peace at last.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> This is what I was really dying to know, so now I can have some peace at last.


Seriously, try it lol. If you ever get lost in the woods or something, you can use it to call for help. Makes a really loud whistle with barely any breath. Also, sometimes it attracts squirrels.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> Seriously, try it lol. If you ever get lost in the woods or something, you can use it to call for help. Makes a really loud whistle with barely any breath. Also, sometimes it attracts squirrels.


Really though, it wouldn't surprise me if you're being cryptic just in case you're wrong. 

Also, knowing my type from a couple of posts? Last time you only needed to see my avatar if I remember right. So I guess you're slacking.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> Really though, it wouldn't surprise me if you're being cryptic just in case you're wrong.
> 
> Also, knowing my type from a couple of posts? Last time you only needed to see my avatar if I remember right. So I guess you're slacking.


I don't remember that lol. I remember avatars better than names, though. Your current one's thousand yard stare is creepy lol.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> I don't remember that lol. I remember avatars better than names, though. Your current one's thousand yard stare is creepy lol.


Creepy? Why?

But yeah, I tend to change my avatar, so.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> Creepy? Why?
> 
> But yeah, I tend to change my avatar, so.


Well, I actually am EII, and thousand yard stare activates empathy into violent traumas. Also may have hemophibia lol. Try not to look at blood and such enough to find out lol.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


> Well, I actually am EII, and thousand yard stare activates empathy into violent traumas. Also may have hemophibia lol. Try not to look at blood and such enough to find out lol.


Hm, I'm not sure if someone needs to be an EII in order to feel empathy for that sort of thing, but I would say she looks rather sympathetic yes. It helps that I know the character as she's from a cartoon I watch too.





(Though they don't put her in armor in the cartoon, but it makes for a nice picture)


----------



## FueledByEvil

Jeremy8419 said:


> Yup. It's my secret, though. Ima keep it in my pocket... With my bag of lucky charms and my acorn husk. (if you put the husk between your thumbs and blow across the edge, it makes a loud whistle)


OK this is aweeeesooommmeeeeeeeeeee !!!!!!!


where the heck can I get a bag of lucky charms that fits is my pocket !!!!!!

my life is almost complete !


----------



## Word Dispenser

Ommgggg.. I love food. Delicious food. And candy! AAAH.


----------



## FueledByEvil

Word Dispenser said:


> Ommgggg.. I love food. Delicious food. And candy! AAAH.


fellow ILE ...nice .. new to socionics .. but stomp around the ENTP thread quite a bit. 

Nice to meat ya !


----------



## Word Dispenser

FueledByEvil said:


> fellow ILE ...nice .. new to socionics .. but stomp around the ENTP thread quite a bit.
> 
> Nice to meat ya !


Hallo. :kitteh:

That sub-forum used to be my stomping grounds... I even got some stickies in there! I am revered as an ENTP Goddess in those parts.. I am myth.. LEGEND.

And..


----------



## FueledByEvil

Word Dispenser said:


> Hallo. :kitteh:
> 
> That sub-forum used to be my stomping grounds... I even got some stickies in there! I am revered as an ENTP Goddess in those parts.. I am myth.. LEGEND.
> 
> You know are new Mod just deleted over half the stickies eh
> 
> and is INTP ?! sa·cré bleu !!!!!
> 
> did it democratically dictator styles ...
> 
> So tossed up a poll for what ones to keep and then deleted alone.


----------



## Word Dispenser

FueledByEvil said:


> Word Dispenser said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hallo. :kitteh:
> 
> That sub-forum used to be my stomping grounds... I even got some stickies in there! I am revered as an ENTP Goddess in those parts.. I am myth.. LEGEND.
> 
> You know are new Mod just deleted over half the stickies eh
> 
> and is INTP ?! sa·cré bleu !!!!!
> 
> did it democratically dictator styles ...
> 
> So tossed up a poll for what ones to keep and then deleted alone.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, lost my Dream interpretation sticky. Ah well. Still got my ideas and stream of consciousness sticky. :kitteh:
Click to expand...


----------



## Entropic

GnothiSeauton said:


> What made me consider being an ethician is the amount of attention and focus I have on my inner states and moods, I can sometimes be extremely self-absorbed in the attempt to work myself out like a jigsaw puzzle, and finally put a "label", a definition on myself. This is simply some perverted intellectual interest of mine, with no set practical purpose, so I can see how it could be Ti-focused.
> 
> 
> 
> This is an odd part of Fe descriptions to me, because I'm not sure I feel a need to manipulate others' feelings. For the most part, I have a default 'cheerful' state I show others in interaction, tend to joke around and don't take myself too seriously. However I don't take the initiative in setting any emotional tone myself, I just decide whether to join in or not. I guess this is a strong argument against Fe-dom.
> 
> If I don't like a certain type of emotional atmosphere, I am more likely to just want to abandon it or not get involved at all. This could be due to any reason, such as the presence of people I don't like or I am unfamiliar with, or if there is a risk to be put too much under the spotlight. I can force myself to participate in a social situation I don't feel comfortable with, however my ability to do so is limited. If I do join in, however, I have no problem contributing to the emotional atmosphere and I can appear animated, almost extroverted.
> 
> Sometimes, the atmosphere doesn't even need to be "set". If I have learnt to recognize it as informal, I can participate right away.
> 
> The only instance where I feel skillful in manipulating emotions is via speeches, writing or acting. I can "monologue" extensively about a topic and captivate others' interests. My literature professor often mentioned that she would be 'moved' by what I wrote, even if it didn't have any obvious emotional content.
> 
> ...maybe LII _is _correct after all. Do you see SEI as possible?


It is a possibility, but what you mention here definitely goes against Fe leading, anyway.


----------



## GnothiSeauton

Entropic said:


> It is a possibility, but what you mention here definitely goes against Fe leading, anyway.


Ok I see. Thanks for your input.


----------



## counterintuitive

nvm


----------



## Schweeeeks

coagulate said:


> nvm


It's okay to let the profanity out. Just come to Beta ;D


----------



## counterintuitive

Schweeeeks said:


> It's okay to let the profanity out. Just come to Beta ;D


that was a post about ir/rationality not profanity


----------



## Schweeeeks

coagulate said:


> that was a post about ir/rationality not profanity


Edit: Ha! I see what you did, okay. You got me. XD


----------



## counterintuitive

Schweeeeks said:


> _last edited by coagulate; tomorrow at 02:08 pm. *reason: Removed profanity
> 
> *_
> 
> 
> 
> K
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right, I edit *every post I make* _tomorrow_ at 2:08 PM to remove profanity. I edit every post I make TOMORROW. Hm. Yeah. Makes sense. :crazy:

ETA: It's ok, you're not the first person to fall for it. That's the point. ;D


----------



## randomshoes

coagulate said:


> Yes, that's right, I edit *every post I make* _tomorrow_ at 2:08 PM to remove profanity. I edit every post I make TOMORROW. Hm. Yeah. Makes sense. :crazy:
> 
> ETA: It's ok, you're not the first person to fall for it. That's the point. ;D


I see that you perfectly copied the text size and style. Attention to pointless detail. I like it.


----------



## counterintuitive

randomshoes said:


> I see that you perfectly copied the text size and style. Attention to pointless detail. I like it.


Well I tried but actually the size is different. The actual "last edited by" comment size is between sizes 1 and 2 so I can't exactly mimic it :/


----------



## counterintuitive

I think I have the flu or something. Head hurts, randomly dizzy, vaguely nauseated, nose keeps running, eyes are watering, super tired, stuff hurts, am cold. QED. Flu.

OTOH maybe I just need less coffee and more sleep. ;D

*****

I just realized that this thread is the shortest of the quadra hangout threads! Even though they were all started at the same time! :O Why is this? Does this have something to do with quadra values? Are there just fewer Alphas?

*****

Hm, I'm starting to think that I don't actually want to read anything and am just hoping to somehow osmote the theory from being on here. Lol, osmote? The verb form of osmosis? :>

*****

A few hours on PerC and suddenly the "flu" is gone. Lol


----------



## Word Dispenser

counterintuitive said:


> I think I have the flu or something. Head hurts, randomly dizzy, vaguely nauseated, nose keeps running, eyes are watering, super tired, stuff hurts, am cold. QED. Flu.
> 
> OTOH maybe I just need less coffee and more sleep. ;D
> 
> *****
> 
> I just realized that this thread is the shortest of the quadra hangout threads! Even though they were all started at the same time! :O Why is this? Does this have something to do with quadra values? Are there just fewer Alphas?
> 
> *****
> 
> Hm, I'm starting to think that I don't actually want to read anything and am just hoping to somehow osmote the theory from being on here. Lol, osmote? The verb form of osmosis? :>
> 
> *****
> 
> A few hours on PerC and suddenly the "flu" is gone. Lol


Fewer Alphas on this particular sub-forum and at this particular time, maybe. Mostly, it seems like the fact that we can't have an endless stream of back-and-forth makes posting here kind of unappealing, since it's rather disjointed. There are probably lots of Alphas around, just shirking posting.

Gammas love to post because they like to talk about themselves for the sake of it, like a diary. Or, that's how I saw it, anyway. :kitteh:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

I messed up this post lol :shocked: :tongue:

Ah, btw, we've ran out of cookies lately, thats why this hangout was kinda empty. BEcaue you know Alphas are all about that. Maybeee, @Word Dispenser will buy us new candies and cookies and cakes and other sugary sweet stuff andd Alpha population will flourish again. :happy:


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Word Dispenser said:


> Gammas love to post because they like to talk about themselves for the sake of it, like a diary. Or, that's how I saw it, anyway. :kitteh:


I love dissing Gammas too, whats up with that ? :laughing: :crazy:


----------



## FueledByEvil

Should we make a move on the gamma forum ?!


----------



## counterintuitive

Word Dispenser said:


> Fewer Alphas on this particular sub-forum and at this particular time, maybe. *Mostly, it seems like the fact that we can't have an endless stream of back-and-forth makes posting here kind of unappealing, since it's rather disjointed.* There are probably lots of Alphas around, just shirking posting.


Yeah, the bolded is basically the reason I don't post, lol, it's disjointed in time. One person posts, another responds perhaps days later (like I'm doing now haha).


----------



## Verity

Word Dispenser said:


> Fewer Alphas on this particular sub-forum and at this particular time, maybe. Mostly, it seems like the fact that we can't have an endless stream of back-and-forth makes posting here kind of unappealing, since it's rather disjointed. There are probably lots of Alphas around, just shirking posting.
> 
> Gammas love to post because they like to talk about themselves for the sake of it, like a diary. Or, that's how I saw it, anyway. :kitteh:


I think it might be a declaring/asking thing.


----------



## Artorias

-A new comer.
-I want to join "The dark empire", but I am too lazy.


----------



## randomshoes

counterintuitive said:


> Yeah, the bolded is basically the reason I don't post, lol, it's disjointed in time. One person posts, another responds perhaps days later (like I'm doing now haha).


We could interrupt each oth--


----------



## To_august

Alpha hangout feels so dead and abandoned...

Anyway, being on Doctor rewatch and bumped into this great little explanation-of-Ne-cognition moment :kitteh:


----------



## SheWolf

Uhm,

Hi.

I'm still undergoing typing (My thread here)

But uh, most think I belong here with the Alphas so we will see. O.O


----------



## Word Dispenser

Vespera said:


> Uhm,
> 
> Hi.
> 
> I'm still undergoing typing (My thread here)
> 
> But uh, most think I belong here with the Alphas so we will see. O.O


:kitteh: Welcome to the Alphaz.


----------



## SheWolf

Word Dispenser said:


> Vespera said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uhm,
> 
> Hi.
> 
> I'm still undergoing typing (My thread here)
> 
> But uh, most think I belong here with the Alphas so we will see. O.O
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the Alphaz.
Click to expand...

 Not really so sure what to say. Lol.
Perhaps you could elaborate on what Alpha Quadra is exactly?


----------



## Word Dispenser

Vespera said:


> Not really so sure what to say. Lol.
> Perhaps you could elaborate on what Alpha Quadra is exactly?


Alphas are teh awesomez. :kitteh:

I think you were linked quite a few things in your typing thread about the different Quadras. 

But, if I were to summarize each quadra, it would be:

Alpha: Disney
Beta: Pack Animal/Gang/Mafia
Gamma: Emo
Delta: Creative Business


----------



## SheWolf

Word Dispenser said:


> Alphas are teh awesomez. :kitteh:
> 
> I think you were linked quite a few things in your typing thread about the different Quadras.
> 
> But, if I were to summarize each quadra, it would be:
> 
> Alpha: Disney
> Beta: Pack Animal/Gang/Mafia
> Gamma: Emo
> Delta: Creative Business


Hahaah! That's funny. XD I mostly just wanted to hear what Alpha was like in less... technical terms. 

I'm cool with being Disney!


----------



## randomshoes

@Vespera I usually describe Alpha as the let's-have-tea-and-cake-and-discuss-theoretical-physics quadra. We want a comfy atmosphere, an intellectual puzzle, and to not have to do any work ever. That help?


----------



## Word Dispenser

randomshoes said:


> @_Vespera_ I usually describe Alpha as the let's-have-tea-and-cake-and-discuss-theoretical-physics quadra. We want a comfy atmosphere, an intellectual puzzle, and to not have to do any work ever. That help?


Truth. :kitteh: 

So, yeah. Disney. :laughing:


----------



## Jeremy8419

@Word Dispenser

Happy Valentine's Day! (Early)


----------



## sinaasappel

:ninja:


----------



## SheWolf

Jeremy8419 said:


> @Word Dispenser
> 
> Happy Valentine's Day! (Early)


Ew. Valentine's Day.


----------



## SheWolf

randomshoes said:


> @Vespera I usually describe Alpha as the let's-have-tea-and-cake-and-discuss-theoretical-physics quadra. We want a comfy atmosphere, an intellectual puzzle, and to not have to do any work ever. That help?


Sounds...

Positively fabulous. B-)


----------



## counterintuitive

Lol, this confirms I never belonged here :crazy:



Word Dispenser said:


> Alpha: Disney
> Beta: Pack Animal/Gang/Mafia
> Gamma: Emo
> Delta: Creative Business


The only one I remotely relate to is creative business. What can I say, I'm pragmatic and actually want to do productive things to help people sometimes.



randomshoes said:


> @Vespera I usually describe Alpha as the let's-have-tea-and-cake-and-discuss-theoretical-physics quadra. We want a comfy atmosphere, an intellectual puzzle, and to not have to do any work ever. That help?


Hm... While I won't turn down an intellectual puzzle :tongue:, I don't care about comfortable atmospheres or not doing work. While I'm not at all practical or hands-on, lol, I'm still a lot more grounded and pragmatic than these descriptions (I found Disney too childish even when I was a child ). I don't mind doing work, provided it's work I actually want to do (meaning something I find interesting). I value real-world results, such as improvements of systems and developing new systems, and especially those that benefit people. To go my entire life only having talked about ideas and never actually affected the real world and real people would be disappointing to say the least.

I think I'll take my tea to go. I'm sorry I posted in here under false pretenses while I believed I was Alpha, diluting the impression of what Alpha is. Y'all seem cool but clearly I don't belong here. :kitteh:


----------



## SheWolf

So far, this is my two cents about each Quadra

Alpha: The Fun Zone
Beta: Wut 
Gamma: who pissed in your Cheerios?
Delta: *snores*


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Jeremy8419 said:


>


That's terrible.


----------



## counterintuitive

Vespera said:


> So far, this is my two cents about each Quadra
> 
> Alpha: The Fun Zone
> Beta: Wut
> *Gamma: who pissed in your Cheerios?*
> Delta: *snores*


Haha, that's definitely my impression of Gammas.  No offense! ;D


----------



## Jeremy8419

Distortions said:


> That's terrible.


You shoulda seen the X-rated version...


----------



## karmachameleon

counterintuitive said:


> Lol, this confirms I never belonged here :crazy:
> 
> 
> 
> The only one I remotely relate to is creative business. What can I say, I'm pragmatic and actually want to do productive things to help people sometimes.
> 
> 
> 
> Hm... While I won't turn down an intellectual puzzle :tongue:, I don't care about comfortable atmospheres or not doing work. While I'm not at all practical or hands-on, lol, I'm still a lot more grounded and pragmatic than these descriptions (I found Disney too childish even when I was a child ). I don't mind doing work, provided it's work I actually want to do (meaning something I find interesting). I value real-world results, such as improvements of systems and developing new systems, and especially those that benefit people. To go my entire life only having talked about ideas and never actually affected the real world and real people would be disappointing to say the least.
> 
> I think I'll take my tea to go. I'm sorry I posted in here under false pretenses while I believed I was Alpha, diluting the impression of what Alpha is. Y'all seem cool but clearly I don't belong here. :kitteh:


Do you know your "new" quadra?


----------



## SheWolf

karmachameleon said:


> Do you know your "new" quadra?


They said they believed Delta I think


----------



## counterintuitive

karmachameleon said:


> Do you know your "new" quadra?





Vespera said:


> They said they believed Delta I think


I related most to creative business yes, but in terms of my understanding of the IEs, I do not value Te and especially not Fi.


----------



## Jeremy8419

counterintuitive said:


> I related most to creative business yes, but in terms of my understanding of the IEs, I do not value Te and especially not Fi.


They could just be incorrect or poor Quadra descriptions, especially since they aren't even comparing similar things.

Deltas like kid movies as well. There is an inherent lack of violent conflict in them (Se). I, personally, like the ones that have moral lessons to them. Shows like Full House appeal to me for similar reasons.


----------



## To_august

counterintuitive said:


> Lol, this confirms I never belonged here :crazy:
> 
> The only one I remotely relate to is creative business. What can I say, I'm pragmatic and actually want to do productive things to help people sometimes.
> Hm... While I won't turn down an intellectual puzzle :tongue:, I don't care about comfortable atmospheres or not doing work. While I'm not at all practical or hands-on, lol, I'm still a lot more grounded and pragmatic than these descriptions (I found Disney too childish even when I was a child ). I don't mind doing work, provided it's work I actually want to do (meaning something I find interesting). I value real-world results, such as improvements of systems and developing new systems, and especially those that benefit people. To go my entire life only having talked about ideas and never actually affected the real world and real people would be disappointing to say the least.
> 
> I think I'll take my tea to go. I'm sorry I posted in here under false pretenses while I believed I was Alpha, diluting the impression of what Alpha is. Y'all seem cool but clearly I don't belong here. :kitteh:


I don't mind doing work, or, in truth, I like to do work that I like to do  Like, create something, bring a change. But aren't everybody like to do stuff they find interesting? 
Atmospheres I don't pay much attention to tbh, I only do when I feel like they are hostile or draining.
I like Disney though, but some gritty stuff too  

Of course there's possibility of me skewing Alpha image for not being one, but, meh, there's nothing to apologize about. If someone values Ti, Fe, Si, Ne in some order and devalues all the rest IEs they are Alpha. Comfy, harmless Alphas are more of a stereotype anyway. People differ in many ways, which are irrespective of their belonging to some quadra.


----------



## Word Dispenser

crashbandicoot said:


> Alphas ! I'm curious, which types do you find weird/alien/creepy in general ?
> Not saying this in a mean way


Hmm... I don't think I find types creepy. More people.

The kind of people who look at you with an intense, dark stare. Who smell like they haven't bathed in awhile. And who abruptly explode in random tantrums.


----------



## Jeremy8419

Word Dispenser said:


> Hmm... I don't think I find types creepy. More people.
> 
> The kind of people who look at you with an intense, dark stare. Who smell like they haven't bathed in awhile. And who abruptly explode in random tantrums.


*sniff sniffs armpits*

Awwww.....

/walks slowly away


----------



## Word Dispenser

Jeremy8419 said:


> *sniff sniffs armpits*
> 
> Awwww.....
> 
> /walks slowly away


Haha, yes. Definitely Jeremy. :kitteh:


----------



## Jeremy8419

Word Dispenser said:


> Haha, yes. Definitely Jeremy. :kitteh:


I feel bad for your mirror LOL

You sure you aren't secretly an SEE in disguise?


----------



## Word Dispenser

Jeremy8419 said:


> I feel bad for your mirror LOL
> 
> You sure you aren't secretly an SEE in disguise?


I hope so! Then @Night Huntress and I could be twins! <3


----------



## Jeremy8419




----------



## Vermillion

Word Dispenser said:


> I hope so! Then @_Night Huntress_ and I could be twins! <3


Aww that would be fantastic <3 best twinsies.


----------



## NTlazerman

Does anyone have any idea why we are the least numbered of all quadras here on the forums? After all, we are a happy, positive society of intelligent people who support each other. I find it weird. Maybe it's because we just want to have fun and not argue over pointless things, because we pretty much agree on many things. On the other hand, we love friendly debate and conversations. Dunno.


----------



## counterintuitive

NTlazerman said:


> Does anyone have any idea why we are the least numbered of all quadras here on the forums? After all, we are a happy, positive society of intelligent people who support each other. I find it weird. Maybe it's because we just want to have fun and not argue over pointless things, because we pretty much agree on many things. On the other hand, we love friendly debate and conversations. Dunno.


For starters, most of the Alpha SFs on here think they're Beta NFs or even Delta NFs. :tongue:


----------



## Parrot

NTlazerman said:


> Does anyone have any idea why we are the least numbered of all quadras here on the forums? After all, we are a happy, positive society of intelligent people who support each other. I find it weird. Maybe it's because we just want to have fun and not argue over pointless things, because we pretty much agree on many things. On the other hand, we love friendly debate and conversations. Dunno.


Adding to what @counterintuitive said, SFJs aren't as likely to be on this site. ESFJs, especially, are likely the most common personality type with ISFJs not far behind (maybe even more). Those types are probably more attracted to other sites like Pinterest so as a result, this hangout thread is probably more NTPs.


----------



## GnothiSeauton

Drunk Parrot said:


> Adding to what @_counterintuitive_ said, SFJs aren't as likely to be on this site. ESFJs, especially, are likely the most common personality type with ISFJs not far behind (maybe even more). Those types are probably more attracted to other sites like Pinterest so as a result, this hangout thread is probably more NTPs.


See, I've always been doubtful of this type of conclusion. Sites aren't mutually exclusive to visit. If Pinterest, for example, really caters to Alpha SFs, it still doesn't explain why it should absorb all their attention, away from this site.

So while you're possibly right, I tend to give the "some people are mistyped" explanation a little more weight, personally.


----------



## Parrot

GnothiSeauton said:


> See, I've always been doubtful of this type of conclusion. Sites aren't mutually exclusive to visit. If Pinterest, for example, really caters to Alpha SFs, it still doesn't explain why it should absorb all their attention, away from this site.
> 
> So while you're possibly right, I tend to give the "some people are mistyped" explanation a little more weight, personally.


Sites _like_ Pinterest. If you haven't noticed, Sensors are far underrepresented on this site. They make up less than 25% of members despite being 70-75% of the population. Our sister types, with the alpha quadra, consequently, are out doing other things in the world/internet besides coming to PerC. The other quadras introverted sensor types have decent representation. For some reason, ISFJs are less drawn to PerC than ISFPs or ISTJs. Perhaps there's a negative stygma or maybe they prefer lurking.


----------



## Valtire

Drunk Parrot said:


> If you haven't noticed, Sensors are far underrepresented on this site.


Only if by "underrepresented" you mean mistyped. I would not be surprised if there are more mistyped sensers on this forum than genuine intuitives.


----------



## GnothiSeauton

Drunk Parrot said:


> Sites _like_ Pinterest. If you haven't noticed, Sensors are far underrepresented on this site. They make up less than 25% of members despite being 70-75% of the population. Our sister types, with the alpha quadra, consequently, are out doing other things in the world/internet besides coming to PerC. The other quadras introverted sensor types have decent representation. For some reason, ISFJs are less drawn to PerC than ISFPs or ISTJs. Perhaps there's a negative stygma or maybe they prefer lurking.


I _did _write "for example" roud:.

If you look at this particular subforum, there seems to be a good percentage of Gamma SFs and I am probably a Delta ST myself. So the 'issue' seems to be with Alpha SFs more than anything, as you're saying.

That 75-25% split kind of baffles me, though. Even if I look at the types of people I know IRL, it sounds a bit extreme. Is this figure really accurate?


----------



## Parrot

GnothiSeauton said:


> I _did _write "for example" roud:.
> 
> If you look at this particular subforum, there seems to be a good percentage of Gamma SFs and I am probably a Delta ST myself. So the 'issue' seems to be with Alpha SFs more than anything, as you're saying.
> 
> That 75-25% split kind of baffles me, though. Even if I look at the types of people I know IRL, it sounds a bit extreme. Is this figure really accurate?


70-30 is probably more accurate. The world needs more sensors than intuitives which God/Evolution calculated for. The SFJs I know could be interested in talking about this, irl, but less likely to come onto this type of forum. They'd rather discuss this face to face and be in harmony. Beyond that, SFJs generally find other things to do and would consider typology theory to be a tertiary hobby, at best. Break that out quantitatively, SFJs are vastly underrepresented on this forum but are everywhere, irl.



Fried Eggz said:


> Only if by "underrepresented" you mean mistyped. I would not be surprised if there are more mistyped sensers on this forum than genuine intuitives.


Over 100k registered members on this site, and the majority are intuitives. Blaming this on mistypes is a cop out, imo. Are there some mistypes? Certainly. But this does not mean the lack of sensors is purely due to mistypes. Typology and psychology is going to attract a much larger number of intuitives just like heritage festivals would attract SJs and night clubs attract SPs. Talking about abstract topics might frustrate many sensors (not all) so they're less likely to come to this site, much less even search for a site like this. That doesn't make them dumb, as I can't stand typical "xSTx" topics like what car I'm driving and the engine specs.

There's a reason we differentiate between types and discuss how that impacts the real world. The higher influx of intuitives to PerC is a good example of how intuition is attracted to certain topics.


----------



## willowglass

I've been on Pinterest abt 4 years, I think. My fb used to be connected to my Pinterest account (I deleted my fb, thank god) so I have a fair idea of the types of some people, and like comparing them with others, lol. It's been interesting the correlations of what I presume to be their types, how much they pin, and what they pin...I'd say the people that get the most obsessed with it are IEE's. I'd say Alpha SF's tend to focus more on food, exercise, and home improvement pins (& honestly, the ones I know don't pin that much, they are on fb much more, unless they are promoting something), Beta NF's on aesthetics, Delta NF's on fandoms & whatever else interests them at the time. But I notice some similarities in some general NF stuff which can look superficially similar by the clubs despite being different quadras... Really, what I don't see that much on Pinterest are Gammas. Either they don't like Pinterest, I'm not noticing them, or we just aren't crossing paths...of course I could be seeing what I want to see or something... like the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon.

Of course I could be typing some people wrong, but I thought I'd share. I noticed correlations in hobbies too. Like I noticed if someone likes Art Nouveau, I'm more likely to like the rest of their boards, too. Delta thing? Idk. Sometimes interests come in bulks, and some peoples interests are really similar. I think it's really cool when I come by it once in a while. I wish somebody would do a study on it. I tried to find something about it on google, but...nothing.

I love heritage festivals, myself. They don't have to particularly be mine. Any will do. lol. My LIE grandma and I always used to love going to the Native American Powwows, despite not being Native American. My LSE husband would think they are a waste of time. The ESE's I know like them, but for different reason than I do.

I've never been to a club or bar, though, or have any interest in going to one ever. Not my thing.

Anyway, my point is, there are probably loose correlations, imo, but people of all types do things for different reasons...they might be drawn to the same sites, but their focus is going to be on different things.


----------



## Valtire

GnothiSeauton said:


> That 75-25% split kind of baffles me, though. Even if I look at the types of people I know IRL, it sounds a bit extreme. Is this figure really accurate?


It was made up by someone in MBTI. It's supposed to make intuitives feel like special unique snowflakes.



Drunk Parrot said:


> Over 100k registered members on this site, and the majority are intuitives. Blaming this on mistypes is a cop out, imo. Are there some mistypes? Certainly. But this does not mean the lack of sensors is purely due to mistypes.


I didn't say that for some cop out reason. I pay attention to what's going on around me. It's blatantly obvious that most people here are mistyped. If you read the 'INTJ' section you find Ti and Se are the most common functions there and the ENFP section is dominated by Fe and Si.

You're being naive by trusting that these mass self-typings are accurate.

Why are you posting all this MBTI nonsense in the Socionics section? I come here specifically because MBTI is a typist system. I don't particularly want to be around people who support it's typism like you are doing here.



Drunk Parrot said:


> Talking about abstract topics might frustrate many sensors (not all)


Introverts are abstract and extroverts are concrete; that's basic Jungian typology. Talking about _intuitive_ topics either excites or fascinates most sensers. My love of Ni brought me in here, and I used to be mistyped as an intuitive because of it.



Drunk Parrot said:


> There's a reason we differentiate between types and discuss how that impacts the real world. The higher influx of intuitives to PerC is a good example of how intuition is attracted to certain topics.


No it's not. The tendencies are not remotely that extreme.


----------



## Parrot

Fried Eggz said:


> It was made up by someone in MBTI. It's supposed to make intuitives feel like special unique snowflakes.


I think it's accurate. I can feel like a special snowflake except the times where I'm clearly a snowflake in the desert. Intuitives believing they're life's protagonists are full of shit. We all have skills. Mine are less needed, on a mass scale, but equally important. If you perceive that as superiority, that's fine.



> I didn't say that for some cop out reason. I pay attention to what's going on around me. It's blatantly obvious that most people here are mistyped. If you read the 'INTJ' section you find Ti and Se are the most common functions there and the ENFP section is dominated by Fe and Si.


I doubt you can provide mass proof that this is the case. If you go to the ISFP section you'll find that some of them use logic. Good heavens! You're just making assumptions and I'm countering by saying I haven't seen it. He said - he said, meaningless.



> You're being naive by trusting that these mass self-typings are accurate.
> Why are you posting all this MBTI nonsense in the Socionics section? I come here specifically because MBTI is a typist system. I don't particularly want to be around people who support it's typism like you are doing here.


I'm a typology enthusiast. MBTI-Socionics are just different schools of thought describing the same thing. I use MBTI 4-letters as it's an easier frame of reference. Personally, I don't think there's a difference between ESE & ESFJ, and I prefer Socionic's Model A description of function stackings. I also like the relationship descriptions as a general framework. Beyond that, neither Socionics nor MBTI, is complete as a full system. Emotions must be taken into account which is why I favor Enneagram as a supplementary typing system.





> Jon Snow, introverts are abstract and extroverts are concrete; that's basic Jungian typology. Talking about _intuitive_ topics either excites or fascinates most sensers. My love of Ni brought me in here, and I used to be mistyped as an intuitive because of it.


I always frame my language to insure I speak of quantitative generalities. More often than not, LSIs are not as drawn to these topics as an LII might be. See what I did there? I didn't exclude people like you. I did, however, say your attraction to this topic is not as common. I've worked in data so I'm well aware of how to draw conclusions, calculate error, and hypothesize about future trends.



> No it's not. The tendencies are not remotely that extreme.


I am not naive. Instead, I am certainly more knowledgeable than you. Not saying you aren't, but I'm one of the best. If you're lucky, you'll learn something. :wink:

Anyway, welcome to the Alpha hangout thread by good Beta sir.


----------



## GnothiSeauton

I challenge the notion that Sensors don't like discussing abstract topics, as well. Even if that were the case, typology is hardly _abstract _to be honest; it is very easy to find correlates and examples of what it hypothesizes in the real world, just by observing people. I tend to classify as 'abstract' other kinds of stuff, such as advanced maths and physics - of which I'm not an expert of course, and my poor brain doesn't really feel up to it all the time, but still, it's fascinating and I can enjoy discussing it with people. There, I feel, resides a lot of the _imagination_, the _intuition_ that is supposedly the domain of N people. How many people end up working in science-related fields, anyway? I would argue that it is not a significant percentage, even among NTs, and you don't need to be iNtuitive to succeed in these fields anyway. I mean, if I look at my engineering class, there aren't really many people who manage to stand out and understand the material immediately - they all need to work hard.

I'd argue that whether or not you like abstract topics is more correlated with general intelligence. People that are above-average smart are more likely to reply that they enjoy discussing ideas on an MBTI test, and thus, get labeled as iNtuitive. I have no idea what the real split between Sensors and iNtuitives is, but I'm also fairly certain that this stuff isn't free from bias, so I'm generally sceptical of whatever stat comes out of it.


----------



## Parrot

GnothiSeauton said:


> I challenge the notion that Sensors don't like discussing abstract topics, as well. Even if that were the case, typology is hardly _abstract _to be honest; it is very easy to find correlates and examples of what it hypothesizes in the real world, just by observing people. I tend to classify as 'abstract' other kinds of stuff, such as advanced maths and physics - of which I'm not an expert of course, and my poor brain doesn't really feel up to it all the time, but still, it's fascinating and I can enjoy discussing it with people. There, I feel, resides a lot of the _imagination_, the _intuition_ that is supposedly the domain of N people. How many people end up working in science-related fields, anyway? I would argue that it is not a significant percentage, even among NTs, and you don't need to be iNtuitive to succeed in these fields anyway. I mean, if I look at my engineering class, there aren't really many people who manage to stand out and understand the material immediately - they all need to work hard.
> 
> *I'd argue that whether or not you like abstract topics is more correlated with general intelligence.* People that are above-average smart are more likely to reply that they enjoy discussing ideas on an MBTI test, and thus, get labeled as iNtuitive. I have no idea what the real split between Sensors and iNtuitives is, but I'm also fairly certain that this stuff isn't free from bias, so I'm generally sceptical of whatever stat comes out of it.


It probably is correlated with general intelligence. As far as abstract capabilities, it certainly is if you want to be advanced. Concrete information about typology is for basic people. Might as well as learn DISC and keep it simple. If you're smart enough to discuss this, congratulations. Make up whatever correlation you think I'm making to feel better about yourself.


----------



## Parrot

GIA Diamonds said:


> Don't talk your way out of this XD seriously though I could see you at least being an alpha in socionics and an Intp in mbti...


INTP/LII is alpha...

Btw @Earthious you have a very low thanked number, but your thanks given is even lower. 

You receive little, because you give little.


----------



## sinaasappel

Drunk Parrot said:


> INTP/LII is alpha...
> 
> Btw @Earthious you have a very low thanked number, but your thanks given is even lower.
> 
> You receive little, because you give little.


RAWR all I nks is I'm ILE I don't go any deeper into the other types (other than LIE) because I will confuse myself with my type


----------



## sinaasappel

GIA Diamonds said:


> RAWR all I nks is I'm ILE I don't go any deeper into the other types (other than LIE) because I will confuse myself with my type


My autocorrect is scum now


----------



## 1000BugsNightSky

GIA Diamonds said:


> Don't talk your way out of this XD seriously though I could see you at least being an alpha in socionics and an Intp in mbti...


as oppsed to what else? 



Drunk Parrot said:


> INTP/LII is alpha...
> 
> Btw @Earthious you have a very low thanked number, but your thanks given is even lower.
> 
> You receive little, because you give little.


6,500 of the posts my post count are dummy posts. Like you wont find them, not evene in my post history. It's a fake placeholder set by the mods. Maybe you can ask for one too, so you can customize your own post rank, flounce bird. 


So really it's about 1377 posts to 1202 thanks, which is about a 1:1 ratio, which is not bad for 1. an INTP who 2. Posts primarily in the what are you thinking thread because both of those have about below average rates. I wonder what the avg thank to post ratio on perC is actually. 

a general scale would be 1:1 very good, respected; 2:1 amazing, extremely impressed; 3+:1 godlike. 

you see?

(Though i do have an intj ally now, so i have to step it up a bit.)


----------



## Parrot

Earthious said:


> as oppsed to what else?
> 
> 
> 
> 6,500 of the posts my post count are dummy posts. Like you wont find them, not evene in my post history. It's a fake placeholder set by the mods. Maybe you can ask for one too, so you can customize your own post rank, flounce bird.
> 
> 
> So really it's about 1377 posts to 1202 thanks, which is about a 1:1 ratio, which is not bad for 1. an INTP who 2. Posts primarily in the what are you thinking thread because both of those have about below average rates. I wonder what the avg thank to post ratio on perC is actually.
> 
> a general scale would be 1:1 very good, respected; 2:1 amazing, extremely impressed; 3+:1 godlike.
> 
> you see?
> 
> (Though i do have an intj ally now, so i have to step it up a bit.)


You are in denial; bless you young one.


----------



## sinaasappel

Earthious said:


> as oppsed to what else?
> 
> 
> 
> 6,500 of the posts my post count are dummy posts. Like you wont find them, not evene in my post history. It's a fake placeholder set by the mods. Maybe you can ask for one too, so you can customize your own post rank, flounce bird.
> 
> 
> So really it's about 1377 posts to 1202 thanks, which is about a 1:1 ratio, which is not bad for 1. an INTP who 2. Posts primarily in the what are you thinking thread because both of those have about below average rates. I wonder what the avg thank to post ratio on perC is actually.
> 
> a general scale would be 1:1 very good, respected; 2:1 amazing, extremely impressed; 3+:1 godlike.
> 
> you see?
> 
> (Though i do have an intj ally now, so i have to step it up a bit.)


Beta I guess lol


----------



## counterintuitive

counterintuitive said:


> :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
> I'm only still on this forum because of this smiley/emoticon
> :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
> :crazy: :crazy:


Shit I'm still here. I guess I can keep posting. Whatever

@counterintuitive check out this idiot


----------



## Retsu

counterintuitive said:


> Shit I'm still here. I guess I can keep posting. Whatever
> 
> @counterintuitive check out this idiot


Can we do alpha things together? I'm underexposed to my own.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley

Abandoned MBTI. I can't take it anymore. I'm hoping to make sense of typology via this sanctum.


----------



## Retsu

Lord Fudgingsley said:


> Abandoned MBTI. I can't take it anymore. I'm hoping to make sense of typology via this sanctum.


Socionics lets us pretend that we're smart by using fancy words more often.

I love it <3


----------



## Parrot

Retsu said:


> Socionics lets us pretend that we're smart by using fancy words more often.
> 
> I love it <3


Indeed, I feel quite ostentatious around here and cause others to act avariciously in their attempt to claim my prestige.

:gentleman:


----------



## Max

*Just a Beta, stalking this thread and laughing at its inactivity.*



*Nothing to see here, move on folks!


----------



## counterintuitive

Retsu said:


> Can we do alpha things together? I'm underexposed to my own.


Sure :kitteh:



Lord Fudgingsley said:


> Abandoned MBTI. I can't take it anymore. I'm hoping to make sense of typology via this sanctum.





Retsu said:


> Socionics lets us pretend that we're smart by using fancy words more often.
> 
> I love it <3


I do think it is a much better system, heh heh :kitteh: :crazy: :crazy:


----------



## ixwolvesix

hey


----------



## counterintuitive

Gah, I can't stop posting. I just want to pooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooost.


----------



## Captain Mclain

This looks like an alpha dual interaction to me


----------



## Parrot

Captain Mclain said:


> This looks like an alpha dual interaction to me


ESFJ & ENTP? I can see it.


----------



## Kisshoten

I have a wonder: how does one work towards improving relations of supervision? 
I'm supervisor, my supervisee is an LSI. I want to not be oppressive towards my supervisee. 

Any advise?


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Yasuo said:


> I have a wonder: how does one work towards improving relations of supervision?
> I'm supervisor, my supervisee is an LSI. I want to not be oppressive towards my supervisee.
> 
> Any advise?


These are some critiques of supervisee.

In your case:

ENTp on ISTj: "logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual"


Mine. How ENTJ see me:

ENTj on INFp: "lots of lofty goals but clueless as to how to get there, lives in dream world"

They amuse me:


ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything"
ENTp on ISTj: "logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual"
INTj on ENFp: "lots of crazy, inconsistent ideas, always on the move but in all directions"
ISFp on ENFj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"

ENFj on INTp: "has no idea what impression s/he's making on others, hopeless"
ESTp on INTj: "intelligent perhaps but no backbone and unfit for the real world"
ISTj on ESFp: "makes absolutely no sense, totally chaotic, a loose cannon"
INFp on ESFj: "says and does a lot without ever getting anywhere"

ENTj on INFp: "lots of lofty goals but clueless as to how to get there, lives in dream world"
ESFp on INFj: "too nice, no backbone, unfit for the real world"
ISFj on ESTp: "how can anyone trust them?"
INTp on ESTj: "rushes into doing things without knowing where to go"

ESTj on ISFp: "lazy and can't do anything right"
ENFp on ISFj: "set on their ways, without imagination, or always expecting the worst"
INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?"
ISTp on ENTj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"


----------



## Kisshoten

FearAndTrembling said:


> These are some critiques of supervisee.
> 
> In your case:
> 
> ENTp on ISTj: "logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual"


Thanks, but I was looking at advise for not pressing on my supervisee's weak spot with my strong spot (Ne). How do I practically implement it? 

Like, what do I do? Simply not acknowledging that I might feel this way (logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual) about the supervisee will not lead to any actual change in how I approach any situation with the supervisee. 

I also read that even if the supervisor does not intend to snub the supervisee, the latter may feel threatened or subjugated. How do I make the supervisee understand that there is no subjugation being practiced and therefore no need for oppression to be felt?


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Yasuo said:


> Thanks, but I was looking at advise for not pressing on my supervisee's weak spot with my strong spot (Ne). How do I practically implement it?
> 
> Like, what do I do? Simply not acknowledging that I might feel this way (logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual) about the supervisee will not lead to any actual change in how I approach any situation with the supervisee.
> 
> I also read that even if the supervisor does not intend to snub the supervisee, the latter may feel threatened or subjugated. How do I make the supervisee understand that there is no subjugation being practiced and therefore no need for oppression to be felt?


Stop theorizing, asking what if questions. Stuff that isn't practical. Like my buddy is a Se or Te dom and built a nice bar from scratch. Every part of the discussion must be practical. He's saying all this stuff like how the bars operate and how to make it more efficient. And I try to expand it to larger, actually interesting issues. lol. It is the only way things can be made interesting for me. To idealize them and remove them from their immediacy. 

I said I relate to a lot of the ENTP description. I get bored fucking easily. 


*The ILE is typically a "big picture" kind of person, and tends to speak in generalizations about both people and things, omitting any details he deems mundane or uninteresting. - 

**Though the ILE can demonstrate a head for practical or efficient reasoning, particularly in conjunction with the ignoring function Ni, he will typically resort to it only to sell the merits of his ideas. The ILE is more concerned with the possibility of creating than in finding the best way to do something.**When the demand exists, the ILE will deliver a practical and realistic rationale or solution, but be prepared for a tack that is singularly unorthodox. The ILE will not be boxed in by the rules of convention, rather he will actively search for a new way to perform a task. In this way, ILEs are often seen cutting corners. To others, this may be seen as snubbing the rules, and rightfully so, because the ILE dislikes the idea of a preset way of performing a task. It is counter-intuitive to their Ego. To the ILE, they are more likely playfully reinventing convention in order to show how their skills are best used or perhaps to prove that their manner of approaching the task surpasses that of Te-ego types in efficiency and practicality.

**The ILE finds it difficult to get himself to do uninteresting, tedious work simply out of responsibility. If he has to, he will acutely feel his own lack of discipline. Thus the ILE is more comfortable when he has a flexible schedule and is free to pursue whatever seems most interesting to him at the moment.The ILE is typically only able to sustain short periods of strenuous activity.

*They are inside the box basically. But we need people inside the box. Most knowledge is in there. lol. Like Myst for example. She goes through all that detail and logic that I cannot tolerate. She is necessary. I learned from her.


----------



## Kisshoten

FearAndTrembling said:


> Stop theorizing, asking what if questions. Stuff that isn't practical. Like my buddy is a Se or Te dom and built a nice bar from scratch. Every part of the discussion must be practical. He's saying all this stuff like how the bars operate and how to make it more efficient. And I try to expand it to larger, actually interesting issues. lol. It is the only way things can be made interesting for me. To idealize them and remove them from their immediacy.


To not theorize... wow... I have no idea how not to do that. I can't go one minute without a 'what if' statement. 

Just.. wow...


----------



## FearAndTrembling

I like how Freeman Dyson classified scientists. Similar principle. 


“Unifiers_are people whose driving passion is to find general principles which will explain everything. They are happy if they can leave the universe looking a little simpler than they found it.”__

“Diversifiers are people whose passion is to explore details. They are in love with the heterogeneity of nature […]They are happy if they leave the universe a little more complicated than they found it.” 

_And him on the difference between Feynman and Einstein:_

Great scientists come in two varieties, which Isaiah Berlin, quoting the seventh-century-BC poet Archilochus, called foxes and hedgehogs. Foxes know many tricks, hedgehogs only one. Foxes are interested in everything, and move easily from one problem to another. Hedgehogs are interested only in a few problems which they consider fundamental, and stick with the same problems for years or decades. Most of the great discoveries are made by hedgehogs, most of the little discoveries by foxes. Science needs both hedgehogs and foxes for its healthy growth, hedgehogs to dig deep into the nature of things, foxes to explore the complicated details of our marvelous universe. Albert Einstein was a hedgehog; Richard Feynman was a fox.



And another:

Some mathematicians are birds, others are frogs. Birds fly high in the air and survey broad vistas of mathematics out to the far horizon. They delight in concepts that unify our thinking and bringtogether diverse problems from different parts of the landscape. Frogs live in the mud below and see only the flowers that grow nearby. They delight in the details of particular objects, and they solve problems one at a time. I happen to be a frog, but many of my best friends are birds. The main theme of my talk tonight is this. Mathematics needs both birds and frogs. Mathematics is rich and beautiful because birds give it broad visions and frogs give it intricate details. Mathematics is both great art and important science, because it combines generality of concepts with depth of structures. It is stupid to claim that birds are better than frogs because they see farther, or that frogs are better than birds because they see deeper. The world of mathematics is both broad and deep, and we need birds andfrogs working together to explore it.This talk is called the Einstein lecture, and I am grateful to the American Mathematical Societyfor inviting me to do honor to Albert Einstein.Einstein was not a mathematician, but a physicist who had mixed feelings about mathematics. Onthe one hand, he had enormous respect for thepower of mathematics to describe the workingsof nature, and he had an instinct for mathematical beauty which led him onto the right track to find nature’s laws. On the other hand, he had no interestin pure mathematics, and he had no technical skill as a mathematician. In his later years he hired younger colleagues with the title of assistants to do mathematical calculations for him. His way of thinking was physical rather than mathematical.He was supreme among physicists as a bird whosaw further than others. I will not talk about Einstein Since I have nothing new to say.Francis Bacon and René DescartesAt the beginning of the seventeenth century, two great philosophers, Francis Bacon in England andRené Descartes in France, proclaimed the birth ofmodern science. Descartes was a bird, and Bacon was a frog. Each of them described his vision ofthe future. Their visions were very different. Bacon said, “All depends on keeping the eye steadily fixed on the facts of nature.” Descartes said, “I think,therefore I am.”_


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Yasuo said:


> To not theorize... wow... I have no idea how not to do that. I can't go one minute without a 'what if' statement.
> 
> Just.. wow...



Exactly. I made a thread on Ne once and somebody said that it seems like Ne was invented to distract people and stop things from getting done. lol. 

And that is kind of what I do in those situations and how you may be viewed too. You are in the way.


----------



## Kisshoten

FearAndTrembling said:


> Exactly. I made a thread on Ne once and somebody said that it seems like Ne was invented to distract people and stop things from getting done. lol.
> 
> And that is kind of what I do in those situations and how you may be viewed too. You are in the way.


lol.. 
I didn't know I was a distraction. Thanks for letting me know.


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Yasuo said:


> lol..
> I didn't know I was a distraction. Thanks for letting me know.



I said Seinfeld is a Ne show. They said Seinfeld was a show about nothing. Cuz they take every situation and Ne it to the sky. Overanalyze. Nitpick. Come up with these elaborate theories and plans. Ne treats things like silly puddy. It often stretches them to absurdities. 

I'll repost what I said in another thread. It may be totally wrong but whatever:

They said that Seinfeld was a "show about nothing". These guys just sit there, and create these fantasy worlds, and Ne them up to the sky. Ne can create something out of nothing. It can create many things out of nothing. I said before that Ne is the mimic function, and it sees situations and people like silly putty. It stretches them any way it can be stretched. Often to an absurdity. 

What I really like about Ne, and what I think its comedy relies on, is expansion within the absurdity. The absurdity penetrates all situations, and multiplies. Just when you think the absurdity is gonna end, it manifests itself again. I said Ne is like microwave popcorn. It never stops popping. Once you think it is done, another goes off. 

I was recently laughing my balls off at the 60s film The Producers. Mel Brooks has to be Ne. Anyway. These guys realize that they can make a large profit off a play, if it totally flops and closes in one night. They gather funds from investors assuming a long run. But they want to make the worst play ever. So it will close in one night. And they take every step to do it, but cannot. Until they finally end up in prison running the con there. The absurdity prevails. Ne relies on a kind of comedic serendipity. 

Seinfeld is masterful at this. Countless examples. The show even ended with Ne. They were sitting in a jail cell, Neing it up. Again the absurdity prevails. 

One episode I like off the top of my head. Lloyd Braun. He was in the nuthouse. He gets out, and everybody has to be on eggshells around him. Lloyd Braun is the sanest guy there ever was, everything he says is normal and sane. That is the world they have to create for him. Which is obviously an absurdity. So they have to continue to do crazy things, for Braun to maintain his sanity. They end up crazy themselves. And of course nobody understands this world but them. 

Braun orders a hot dog that is obviously very old. The guy behind the counter asks if he is crazy. Kramer immediately jumps up and tells the guy it is perfectly sane thing to eat.

Lloyd goes to the counter, and speaks to the attendant.
LLOYD: I'd like a hotdog, please.
The attendant looks to the machine, which contains one hotdog. The appearance of
the article is not pleasant. It's wrinkled, shriveled, and generally
disgusting.
ATTENDANT: Are you outta your mind?
Hearing this, Kramer dashes over.
KRAMER: Wh...wh...wh... what's the problem here?
ATTENDANT: This hotdog's been here since the silent era. You'd have to be insane
to eat it.
KRAMER: No, no, no, no, no. This man is not insane. Now there's nothing wrong
with it or you.
LLOYD: Kramer, maybe...
KRAMER: No, no, no, no. I'll show you. (slams a bill down on the counter) One
hotdog please.
ATTENDANT: (on your head be it) Okay.
KRAMER: Mmm, doesn't that smell good, huh?
The attendant hands over the hotdog.
KRAMER: Yeah, here we go, yeah. (he takes a big bite) Mmm, oh. That's delicious.
Mmm. It's a perfectly sane food to eat. (he takes another bite)
As he chews, it begins to be apparent that all is not as it should be with the
hotdog.
KRAMER: Uhm, interesting texture. It's chewy. (he half-coughs, half-retches) I
gotta get, some air.
Kramer stumbles toward the exit, bits of half-chewed hotdog falling from his
mouth.



And Jerry has to fake that he wears glasses:


Kramer is handing Jerry a pair of spectacles.
KRAMER: Yeah, put these glasses on.
JERRY: (taking them) Well, what's this for?
KRAMER: Yeah, well Lloyd, he's gonna be here any minute now.
JERRY: So what?
KRAMER: Well, he thinks you wear those.
Jerry looks at the glasses with some distaste.

And George is going crazy:


The remains of George's car are being towed away. On the opposite side of the
road, watching, are Deena and George.
DEENA: So, you want my father to pay for this?
GEORGE: You saw him. He was fiddling with the engine. God knows what he did
there.
DEENA: And I suppose Lloyd Braun had something to do with it too.
GEORGE: No, not Lloyd Braun. But the cashier.
DEENA: What cashier?
GEORGE: You remember the woman on the horse? She wanted my spot.
DEENA: To park her horse?
GEORGE: No, she wasn't on the horse.
DEENA: So, your car caught fire because of my father and the woman on the horse?
GEORGE: That's right.
Across the street, the florist is outside his store, arranging flowers.
GEORGE: (points) And him!
DEENA: The man with the flowers?
GEORGE: Yeah, yeah, the flower guy. Listen, I know this all sounds a little
crazy, but...
A car pulls up beside George and Deena. George looks in the window.
GEORGE: I can't believe it. Look, that's Jerry Seinfeld.
DEENA: Who?
GEORGE: Jerry Seinfeld. My best friend. He can explain all of this. (calls to
Jerry) Jerry.
Jerry hears his name called and turns his head, but all he can see are blurry
colored shapes.
GEORGE: Jerry! Over here Jerry. It's me!
The car pulls away, leaving George calling after it.
GEORGE: Jerry, where y'going? It's... what're...
DEENA: (doubtful) That was your best friend?
GEORGE: Yeah, yeah, but he doesn't wear glasses.
DEENA: That man was wearing glasses.
GEORGE: I know. Don't you see. (emphatic) He was doing it to fool Lloyd Braun!

Nobody outside the main cast is even aware of the absurdity. Another reason why it is great. It is like two worlds.


----------



## Parrot

@FearAndTrembling I see Seinfeld as a Te show. Jerry is an STJ who mostly makes observations. Kramer, the main Ti character, is a wackjob because of his Ti, probably. Ultimately, it's an SJ show that is clever enough for all types to get it.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Seinfield is a show that observes what is apparently true in the world, and then applies it to other parts of the world in ways that are often absurd. That's not Te humor, because Te focuses on processes and the unfolding of things. If it is logic based humor at all, it is Ti. The elements of relatively low Ne are readily apparent too. There are often holes in the extrapolations throughout the show that reveal a sensor way of looking at the world that is using a low level intuitive function and a logical function together.


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Seinfield is a show that observes what is apparently true in the world, and then applies it to other parts of the world in ways that are often absurd. That's not Te humor, because Te focuses on processes and the unfolding of things. If it is logic based humor at all, it is Ti. The elements of relatively low Ne are readily apparent too. There are often holes in the extrapolations throughout the show that reveal a sensor way of looking at the world that is using a low level intuitive function and a logical function together.



I could see lower Si but also Ne is theory and not reality. Costanza for example. This shit sounds good in theory and blows up in their faces in reality. Lower Si is also associated with like germaphobia and hypochondria. Which Seinfeld is.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

I don't think I've ever actually watched Seinfeld. >_>


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

FearAndTrembling said:


> I could see lower Si but also Ne is theory and not reality. Costanza for example. This shit sounds good in theory and blows up in their faces in reality. Lower Si is also associated with like germaphobia and hypochondria. Which Seinfeld is.


I'd say Costanza is definitely low Ne at least. And he is kinda freaked by Jerry's low Si, so what you say makes sense. Jerry gets lotsa shit for the germaphobia from his friends.


----------



## Parrot

When I say Te humor, the characters are mostly Te users except Kramer. And the humor is often bad things happening as they deserve.


----------



## FearAndTrembling

I think the main cast is chaotic and totally out of touch with reality, or totally out of touch with Se and Te. They are slackers too. Another strike against Se and Te. 

They are cynical but they are merry. They bust each other's balls constantly. Definitely see the show as Ti dissection of Fe. You think Te would put up with all that shit?


----------



## SheWolf

Ugh, I haven't watched that show since I was kind of forced to when I was younger.

Kramer was the only one I liked. Otherwise, I actually didn't like this show.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Yeah, I really don't see Se or Te with the main cast. Maybe low Se but Se valuing from Elaine. Might explain some of her clashes with the others


----------



## Word Dispenser

Theeere gooooes my heerooo.. Watch him as he goooes...


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think the main cast is chaotic and totally out of touch with reality, or totally out of touch with Se and Te. They are slackers too. Another strike against Se and Te.
> 
> They are cynical but they are merry. They bust each other's balls constantly. Definitely see the show as Ti dissection of Fe. You think Te would put up with all that shit?


Have you ever seen Curb Your Enthusiasm though. It's daily life made completely absurd.


----------



## Captain Mclain

I know 0 examples of female LII I think, we got some famous?


----------



## Azazel

Captain Mclain said:


> I know 0 examples of female LII I think, we got some famous?


Hm. Tina Fey? She strikes me as some kind of ILE Ti. But, from now I'm not getting any LII famous woman.

I'm getting some(few) MBTI INTPs, but as long as I'm new to this I don't know if they're LIIs at all, as an example, Marie Curie.

PD: Oh, NVM. I found this: Socionics - the16types.info - Socionics Type Examples with Videos


----------



## sinaasappel

:ninja:


----------



## Jakuri

GIA Diamonds said:


> :ninja:


Stealth ninja @GIA Diamonds is recognized.


----------



## sinaasappel

Jakuri said:


> Stealth ninja @GIA Diamonds is recognized.


Why did I not friend you yet :kitteh:


----------



## Immolate

@GIA Diamonds I request an explanation:



> MINDMELDS XDXDXDXDXDXDXDXD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## sinaasappel

lets mosey said:


> @GIA Diamonds I request an explanation:


What didn't I dooooooooo


----------



## Immolate

GIA Diamonds said:


> What didn't I dooooooooo


You piqued my curiosity.


----------



## sinaasappel

lets mosey said:


> You piqued my curiosity.


How so?


----------



## Immolate

GIA Diamonds said:


> How so?


Your sig calls out to me. How did it come to be.


----------



## sinaasappel

lets mosey said:


> Your sig calls out to me. How did it come to be.


XD I just mentioned this in another thread but thank @thissiteisterrible
He posted it and I was like "I'm tempted to make this my signature"


----------



## thissiteisterrible

nl goat


----------



## sinaasappel

Is mass mentioning @thissiteisterrible because he thinks @thissiteisterrible


----------



## sinaasappel

Is mass mentioning @thissiteisterrible because he thinks @thissiteisterrible


----------



## thissiteisterrible

stahp


----------



## Jakuri

GIA Diamonds said:


> Why did I not friend you yet :kitteh:


*waiting for it* 

/introvert



lets mosey said:


> @GIA Diamonds I request an explanation:


Jakuri, concurring. Yes that sig line.


----------



## sinaasappel

Where did the party go?


----------



## FueledByEvil

GIA Diamonds said:


> Where did the party go?


The speakers blew :/
Everyone went to the club.


----------



## sinaasappel

FueledByEvil said:


> The speakers blew :/
> Everyone went to the club.



Boo


----------



## Jakuri

GIA Diamonds said:


> Where did the party go?





FueledByEvil said:


> The speakers blew :/
> Everyone went to the club.





GIA Diamonds said:


> Boo


I suppose everyone went here:


----------



## FueledByEvil

We could look at it the way I used to.

The part aint started _until_ the speakers blow.

So really we are just getting started.

I am sure I can whip up some evil to fuel this thing.


----------



## sinaasappel

Jakuri said:


> I suppose everyone went here:


Rayark has a new game voez!!!


----------



## Jakuri

GIA Diamonds said:


> Rayark has a new game voez!!!


This reminds me I need to play VOEZ. I need to play it 5 days in a row to unlock the next story, but I have been distracted by Reflec beat plus and jubeat plus...


----------



## sinaasappel

Jakuri said:


> This reminds me I need to play VOEZ. I need to play it 5 days in a row to unlock the next story, but I have been distracted by Reflec beat plus and jubeat plus...


I had to delete Cytus and voez for space


----------



## Jakuri

GIA Diamonds said:


> I had to delete Cytus and voez for space




I thought you were busy mastering Bloody Purity.
Maybe once you get a phone or tablet (whichever you are using -- I use iPad for all rhythm games) with a larger hard drive size later on...


----------



## sinaasappel

Jakuri said:


> I thought you were busy mastering Bloody Purity.
> Maybe once you get a phone or tablet (whichever you are using -- I use iPad for all rhythm games) with a larger hard drive size later on...


I definitely need a phone >_> or I could bust out my nook


----------



## SheWolf

I never post here and this thread is always dead.

So, perhaps this'll spark some kind of discussion.

I've been thinking about the three most popular YouTube gamers' types, Markiplier, Jacksepticeye, and PewDiePie.

I believe Jack is an ESE. Very, very animated and trying to entertain his viewers in a warm, child-like way. He seems so innocent lol. I like him and find his sense of humor amusing at times, though I think he talks a little but much. Lol. 





Markiplier I think might be an EIE. He uses a lot of the same voice acting and extravagance that Jack does, but it's not _quite_ as infantile. 






PewDiePie I think is xEE. He is very capable of extravagance much in the same manner as Mark and Jack but I think it's something he generally mocks in himself. I also sense a lot of underlying sarcasm and more sharpness to him than the other two. Seems like he uses Fe as more of a "show" than it being natural like Mark and Jack. I tend to see his act as a little more forced. However, I do enjoy him the most out of the three because Mark and Jack tend to just be a bit too much at times.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Jacksepticeye: He seems clearly intuitive to me. He interacts with the material on a divided level, throwing in much of his own ideas and associations into the show in a nearly nonsensical way. Additionally, he seems like an Fi type to me. The Fe seems very forced - observe his eyes as he emotes and as he is taking a break from emoting. There is a noticeable change. One is an act, and the Fe seems to be the act to me. I'd label him as talking from Ne. IEE, maybe, but the Fi doesn't seem necessarily strong. ILE is more likely, which would explain why Fe seems to be expressed easily and yet isn't...core, if you will? Plus, he just seems Alpha to me.

Markiplier: Awesome dude, although the sheer level of emoting isn't something I need. I think he appeals most to logicians that seek Fe. For himself, I note he is rather uncreative in his on the spot comments. It is more emotive, and less so about what is said. A lot of swear words hurled around when he could be saying things that are more funny in themself. I also get the sense that he is deliberately emoting more than he actually feels. I would rather he emote what he actually feels, which is why I like him more when he starts raging at the game and getting upset. I'd guess him as an SLE or an SEI. He seems Decisive to me.

PewDiePie: I disagree. His act is MUCH less forced, which is why it is so much less energetic. He is more naturally being himself. His flashes of words on screen are abrupt and jarring, though. His laugh is sudden and spontaneous. He seems to me to be emoting much more naturally, which is appealing. I'd guess him as...ESI, most likely. Certainly seems Serious Quadra to me.


----------



## SheWolf

@*Fenix Wulfheart* 

Ive seen several pages that type Jack ESE. I think his emoting is pretty natural BUT I don't think it's his true sentiments.

Mark, I love the man, but sometimes he irritates me lol. Like calm down man. With Jack, he's just so child-like that it's just like alrighty then. 

Pewds is awesome. Always loved his humor. Especially when he does this kind of stuff.


----------



## Entropic

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> PewDiePie: I disagree. His act is MUCH less forced, which is why it is so much less energetic. He is more naturally being himself. His flashes of words on screen are abrupt and jarring, though. His laugh is sudden and spontaneous. He seems to me to be emoting much more naturally, which is appealing. I'd guess him as...ESI, most likely. Certainly seems Serious Quadra to me.


WUT. PewDiePie is an ILE imo. Have you seen his vids with his gf? Don't confuse the less animated Ti ego with Fi valuing. The only other typing I can see for him is IEE, but he's Ne base.


----------



## SheWolf

IEE is fine for Pewds.


----------



## sinaasappel

I love Markiplier, and I agree that he seems more logical and isn't an intuitive.


----------



## SheWolf

GIA Diamonds said:


> I love Markiplier, and I agree that he seems more logical and isn't an intuitive.


Yeah. I could see that. My vote is SLE. He seems Beta Quadra.


----------



## sinaasappel

SheWolf said:


> Yeah. I could see that. My vote is SLE. He seems Beta Quadra.


Yup, but I think he's a bit more introverted in mbti. Despite his persona online


----------



## SheWolf

GIA Diamonds said:


> Yup, but I think he's a bit more introverted in mbti. Despite his persona online


Yeah maybe. Social introversion is a separate beast from cognitive introvert.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Entropic said:


> WUT. PewDiePie is an ILE imo. Have you seen his vids with his gf? Don't confuse the less animated Ti ego with Fi valuing. The only other typing I can see for him is IEE, but he's Ne base.


I didn't see much Ne from him, but the only video I watched was the one provided.


----------



## Entropic

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> I didn't see much Ne from him, but the only video I watched was the one provided.


Ok, I recommend some others, especially those with his gf. I can see why you think ESI at surface level, but ESI is usually much more direct, present and intense in their feelings than this guy is. He's too flimsy. 

Check out Chester Bennington for example:






Or Jared Leto:






Or Lana del Rey:






As a bit more of a fringe example, Eminem:


----------



## Recede

Something I don't really get: why is Ne considered extraverted? I use Ne but I don't focus on the external world in any way.


----------



## Verity

Recede said:


> Something I don't really get: why is Ne considered extraverted? I use Ne but I don't focus on the external world in any way.


Because it doesn't focus on the internal world: _Ne is generally associated with the ability to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize talent and natural propensities in others, reconcile differing perspectives and viewpoints, rapidly generate ideas, and be led by one's intellectual curiosity and stimulate curiosity in others._

It's always looking for something to add to the world outside of oneself basically. _If_ you do not often focus on the potential of objects or associations in the external world at all it would indicate that Ne is not your base function and possibly not even in your ego-block.


----------



## Recede

Verity said:


> Because it doesn't focus on the internal world: _Ne is generally associated with the ability to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize talent and natural propensities in others, reconcile differing perspectives and viewpoints, rapidly generate ideas, and be led by one's intellectual curiosity and stimulate curiosity in others._
> 
> It's always looking for something to add to the world outside of oneself basically. _If_ you do not often focus on the potential of objects or associations in the external world at all it would indicate that Ne is not your base function and possibly not even in your ego-block.


I don't see anything in that paragraph that necessitates a focus on the external world. I don't usually focus on much of anything aside from introspection and daydreaming, and those don't correspond to any particular function in my case. I basically tune out the world and am mentally disengaged, which is kind of a 9 thing. But whenever I do focus on something, I tend to perceive it in terms of potential and possibilities. 

Anyways, I'm not really questioning my type at this point. A while back a professional socionist typed me as ILE, and no other type was even close. It fit very well aside from being an extraverted type, which is not accurate for me by any stretch of the imagination. I ended up leaving socionics for a while. Here I am, months later, and ILE still seems the best fit overall. At this point I can't really see anything other than Ne being my base function. If I've fundamentally misunderstood Ne and it doesn't work as my base, I'd have to leave socionics again as there aren't really any other types that fit adequately.


----------



## sinaasappel

Recede said:


> I don't see anything in that paragraph that necessitates a focus on the external world. I don't usually focus on much of anything aside from introspection and daydreaming, and those don't correspond to any particular function in my case. I basically tune out the world and am mentally disengaged, which is kind of a 9 thing. But whenever I do focus on something, I tend to perceive it in terms of potential and possibilities.
> 
> Anyways, I'm not really questioning my type at this point. A while back a professional socionist typed me as ILE, and no other type was even close. It fit very well aside from being an extraverted type, which is not accurate for me by any stretch of the imagination. I ended up leaving socionics for a while. Here I am, months later, and ILE still seems the best fit overall. At this point I can't really see anything other than Ne being my base function. If I've fundamentally misunderstood Ne and it doesn't work as my base, I'd have to leave socionics again as there aren't really any other types that fit adequately.


You could just be on a borderline I/E axis in mbti.


----------



## Recede

GIA Diamonds said:


> You could just be on a borderline I/E axis in mbti.


Actually not. I'm very much on the extreme end of introversion. And it's definitely not just a phase. So I don't know, I guess I'm just an unusual case?


----------



## sinaasappel

Recede said:


> Actually not. I'm very much on the extreme end of introversion. And it's definitely not just a phase. So I don't know, I guess I'm just an unusual case?


Are you an intp?


----------



## Kabosu

I still have Taylor Swift as an ESE, alpha SF for sure.


----------



## Eset

Wagwan.


----------



## Shinsei

Witch of Britannia said:


> Wagwan.


The amount of effort that went into making that post was beyond incredible.


----------



## Eset

Ghostly Vervain said:


> The amount of effort that went into making that post was beyond incredible.


Didn't you hear;
North-Korea banned sarcasm.

That is beyond ironic, and sarcasm.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Oh, truly staggering effort indeed. Just hitting the 'Post' button is impressive, but typing six letters too? Awe-inspiring


----------



## SheWolf

Kabosu said:


> I still have Taylor Swift as an ESE, alpha SF for sure.


Actually...
I have a couple friends who run a Socionics blog that Informed me that she's actually an EII.
She is an Enneagram 2w3 So/Sp though.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Thorn said:


> Actually...
> I have a couple friends who run a Socionics blog that Informed me that she's actually an EII.
> She is an Enneagram 2w3 So/Sp though.


What was their reasoning for that?


----------



## clarity22

Hi there fellows Alphas. I'm an SEI. So my dual must be ILE.


----------



## Parrot

clarity22 said:


> Hi there fellows Alphas. I'm an SEI. So my dual must be ILE.


So are you ISFJ or ISTJ (Your profile says the latter?)


----------



## clarity22

Drunk Parrot said:


> So are you ISFJ or ISTJ (Your profile says the latter?)


My MBTI type is ISTJ and my sociotype is SEI. You have to remember that MBTI and Socionics use the same functions but in different orders.


----------



## Parrot

clarity22 said:


> My MBTI type is ISTJ and my sociotype is SEI. You have to remember that MBTI and Socionics use the same functions but in different orders.


:dry:

SEI = Si Fe Ni Te Ne Ti something something; point is Si/Fe
ISFJ = Si/Fe

Therefore, SEI = ISFJ because the first two functions are consistent. I know this shit more than you.


----------



## clarity22

Drunk Parrot said:


> :dry:
> 
> SEI = Si Fe Ni Te Ne Ti something something; point is Si/Fe
> ISFJ = Si/Fe
> 
> Therefore, SEI = ISFJ because the first two functions are consistent. I know this shit more than you.


Should I take a Sociotype test here on Personality Cafe?


----------



## Parrot

clarity22 said:


> Should I take a Sociotype test here on Personality Cafe?


No need to do that. Figure out if you use Fe/Ti or Te/Fi. I get the ISFJ impression from you. 

I don't need to take a socionics test, to figure out I'm ILE since I'm ENTP. Socionics vs MBTI functions is just different theories after the first two functions.


----------



## clarity22

Drunk Parrot said:


> No need to do that. Figure out if you use Fe/Ti or Te/Fi. I get the ISFJ impression from you.
> 
> I don't need to take a socionics test, to figure out I'm ILE since I'm ENTP. Socionics vs MBTI functions is just different theories after the first two functions.


I use Te/Fi.


----------



## Parrot

clarity22 said:


> I use Te/Fi.


Congrats!

You Delta :dry:


----------



## clarity22

Drunk Parrot said:


> Congrats!
> 
> You Delta :dry:


Thank you for helping me.


----------



## Parrot

clarity22 said:


> Thank you for helping me.


This type of comment seems so Fe, though.

And this:



> Classic Temperament: Melancholy-Phlegmatic
> DISC: C (conscientious)


Also seems like Fe.

However, if you're 1w2, you seem to have a strong 2w1 fix as well.


----------



## clarity22

Drunk Parrot said:


> This type of comment seems so Fe, though.
> 
> And this:
> 
> 
> 
> Also seems like Fe.
> 
> However, if you're 1w2, you seem to have a strong 2w1 fix as well.


ok


----------



## clarity22

Drunk Parrot said:


> This type of comment seems so Fe, though.
> 
> And this:
> 
> 
> 
> Also seems like Fe.
> 
> However, if you're 1w2, you seem to have a strong 2w1 fix as well.


Between ISFJ and ISTJ in MBTI which do you think that I seem like in your opinion?


----------



## Parrot

clarity22 said:


> Between ISFJ and ISTJ in MBTI which do you think that I seem like in your opinion?


My first guess was ISFJ. But my typing style is putting outfits on people and seeing how they look. Typing over the internet is not as easy since I'm missing verbal cues.


----------



## Wisteria

Valtire said:


> Well yeah. Fe is concerned with controlling expression, and manipulating the feeling tone.
> 
> Jung:
> 
> Note that he even talks about being agreeable, pleasant and positive.


Does socionics used Jung's exact definitions though?


----------



## Valtire

Bad Bunny said:


> Does socionics used Jung's exact definitions though?


I was talking about the Socionics definition of Fe. Jung is just easy to quote. Socionics is built on the Jungian concepts. It has a more practical emphasis, but remains essentially an expansion pack to Jung.


----------



## counterintuitive

@Valtire Were you formerly Fried Eggz?


----------



## PathSeeker

Apparently, I'm an INTj. So here I am.


----------



## Wyrmspirit

Is this sub-forum still alive? I was hoping to actually directly meet some other alphas rather than just read posts from years ago made by alphas.


----------



## Neff90

What a saturated thread, thank you a lot!


----------



## UntetheredBalloon

Hello


----------



## LiarPrince

bombsaway said:


> You can try making a thread in the What's My Type? forum if you haven't already. Since you're INFP MBTI, one theory is that you should just switch J/P so you'd be INFj (IEI) here. Not everyone holds to that theory but it's a starting place. If you want to learn a lot about the theory then check out the sticky threads. It'd be nice to have another SEI around so if you are hopefully I'll see you round!


INFj (IEI) is cursed


----------



## Eva R

Hi everyone!! 😃 

I'm writing from a burner account to separate from my personal account here haha.. 

We mostly know that there's work in the public sphere to legitimise the reputation and scientify our Socionics typology theory.

I'm glad to say, I've gotten approval to do my Master's research paper on Socionics personality types and their relationship with Facebook word choice and Marketing Receptiveness!

I intend to release the analysis results to the community after the defense of my paper. (We are looking at Natural Language Processing models and t-testing to quantify the effect of Jungian functions)

I'm currently collecting survey responses over this weekend, and hope to have your help! - all that's needed is that your main language of use on Facebook is English.

Here's the Google Survey link - it expires on Sunday.









University Study on Personality Type & Marketing Appeal


This academic study consists of a short personality test (Socionics), followed by questions on Marketing Appeal. The estimated time is no more than 30 minutes.




forms.gle





Thanks! 😊


----------



## pyramidserum

administers long-overdue CPR on thread


----------

