# Poll: What type is Turi?



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

Lets settle this


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi, in the ancient times, was known as the "Untypable, the Grey". Legends say that if he labels himself as the same type for over a week, the end of the world — No, the universe, shall come to us. Therefore, in short, he is probably an INFJ.


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Where’s the poll???


----------



## ANAXEL (Feb 16, 2017)

Bunniculla said:


> Where’s the poll???


This is too funny, I'm actually lolling.


Anyways, Turi is a definite introvert. What does he lead with? I think the two leading ones are either Ni or Ti.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

No poll, just comment, you people are so entitled


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

I saw poll. I clicked. There was no poll. My expectation of poll threads is changed forever. *implode*


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Jokes aside, I could see him as an INTP, just fine. From my perspective, his posts are very Ne-heavy and while the way he presents his thoughts seem more Te, the way thoughts are structured, at least when shared with us, seem more Ti.

That said, he says he is a Ni-dom, so there is nothing to be discussed. Surely he knows himself better than others.


----------



## ANAXEL (Feb 16, 2017)

Bunniculla said:


> I saw poll. I clicked. There was no poll. My expectation of poll threads is changed forever. *implode*


After we get through with @Turi, I demand a POLL for @Bunniculla. Switching types on me like that what the crap


----------



## nep2une (Jun 15, 2017)

I just remember that he said himself "_Don't be fooled if I change from INFJ_" and take his word at that...


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

wot in tarnation


----------



## CultOfPersonality (Sep 12, 2017)

he is everything. INTP,INFP,INTJ,ENFJ,INFJ,ISTJ,ISTP,ESFP,ESFJ,ESTJ,ENTJ,ISFJ,ENFP,ENTP,ESTP and ISFP.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

I suppose I should clear things up, lol.
I prefer INFJ.

To provide the worlds worst run-down:

*Ni.*
I am a dominant perceiver - by default, I observe, reflect, then act - ergo, an introverted dominant perceiver.
My observations and reflections are relatively neutral, I'm not attempting to categorise information ala Ti and I'm not attempting to see how things sit with me ala Fi.

Not to mention, I don't know what you guys are smoking sometimes, but I'm clearly an "intuitive" dominant - I state things as fact when they're nothing but abductive reasoning or hypothesis (this is essentially _divining_, if you've got _Depth Typology_ by Mark Hunziker) and I get defensive and take a "fuck you" stance when the validity of what I say is challenged or questioned, or IRL, I simply attempt to divert the conversation - this is almost a verbatim descriptor of an INxJ from _Lenore Thomsons Personality Types: An Owners Manual_, and I use it, and like it, because although it's negative, it's a perfect fit - these traits distinguish Ni from Si in myself, as Si is far more thorough, precise and accurate and therefore Si users are infinitely less prone to possess the same/similar Achilles Heel.

I make wild assumptions and there are massive flaws in my logic, which get pointed out to me every so often - for the most part, I feel my conclusions and observations/ideas are relatively on-point, I'm not overly concerned with building them up with supporting evidence because evidence in itself is something I'm skeptical of and question 24/7 which is where I feel I separate myself from the possibility of having Te in the auxiliary position.

I am an extreme conspiracy theorist (this likely spawns from my focus, and therefore belief, in what _isn't_, which equates to me being suspicious of what _is_), I believe you'll find a lot of Ni dominants to be into conspiracy theories, they're made for us.
I prefer to work with ideas, theories, abstract topics, fantasies, daydreams, dreams and concepts rather than anything based in the 'real world' - and the 'real world' includes my own feelings or impressions about things (not something I often think about), shifting from these into subjects that are more tangible means that I would be forced to deal with "facts" and "reality" more than I would like to, and this will sound pathetic - but I realise that getting involved in those topics directly opposes my natural preference to stray from using facts, or relying on any kind of 'real world' support.

*Fe.*
Most decisions I make, I make with the values, beliefs, thoughts and opinions of others in mind, for every day life - however for larger, possibly life-altering decisions, I take a holier-than-thou stance, and prefer to make them of my own accord - still taking into consideration all of the factors I outlined, however I simply believe I know best, and I don't trust other people to take everything I perceive, into account properly.
I realise this sounds arrogant, but arrogance, imo, is simply a byproduct of Ni.

All of this however is in support of my Ni, I will make decisions that go against all logic if I "know" it's the right thing to do - this isn't an Fi "hunch" or feeling, rather it's spawning from me simply seeing how things play out and knowing the right thing to do - the best thing to do, for all involved.
This isn't at all to say I'm always accurate, just because I lead with Ni doesn't mean I'm "good" at it per say, it just means I lead with Ni.

My Ni has been way off the rails, I've had a couple of people in the car and just "knew" I'd have enough fuel to do what we wanted to do - 45 minute drive to the next town, where we would fill up.
I did not have enough fuel. 

*Se.*
My inferior function is Se, undeniably Se - everything about Se fits this position, from it being something to indulge in times of recreation to clear my mind, to it being a stress trigger - not that I get stressed out often, but when I do - Se.

There is no other function in Naomi Quenks _Was That Really Me?_ that fits this position for me so beautifully, it's just the only option here.


Obviously there's more to it, but that's a brief run-down.


*A couple of other random things I'll add:*

It took me a while to recognise my dominant function was Ni, it simply didn't click that the imagery in my head, and how my mind works, was what the Ni descriptors talk about. I still have difficulty accepting that Ni isn't how everyone sees the world.

I originally tested as INTP and questioned it immediately (on a forum, there's proof), and I knew immediately that according to how I understood the dichotomy I should have been an INFP - as in, I knew I was an introverted intuitive feeling perceiver without even reading the descriptions.
Learning about cognitive functions just shifts that to be INFJ to accurately represent what I already knew about myself, immediately after taking my first ever mbti style test (it was 16personalities..).

In this post, I score the lowest on Ni and Fe: 
http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...-cognitive-functions-test-3.html#post36253202
However almost two weeks earlier, I scored as an INFJ on the same test and can prove this.

For whatever reason, I dislike the idea of being an INFJ in general and tend to fight this, I'd rather be almost any other type, I have known it's the right type for months now (I only even found out about MBTI or typology in like.. March at the earliest..), maybe it's a little sadistic but I want to tear down and expose my own type and dominant function for what they truly are, stripped of all mystique etc.

I feel like I actively oppose the BS hype and stereotypes etc. There's some kind of crusade in my head against it.
This is probably why I like to try to be other types etc just hoping something else clicks, unfortunately nothing does.
I'm 100% open to being any other type.

FWIW, on Reddit I've been typed as basically everything, but ENTP has came up twice now, from some oddball questionnaires.


* *





This has nothing to do with cognitive functions really, but as a kid I used to see auras, still do though far less frequently, I frequently experience deja vu, as a kid I'd get stopped by random people on the streets and in shopping centres who'd just want to stare at me, or talk to me, for some reason (always weird hippy kinds of people) - even with my parent(s?) around.

I have always had a fascination with the paranormal and have seen ghosts though I deny it because it's easier that way, I used to 'intuit' the rooms where my family members had passed away in hospital, I 'intuit' when people are shit i.e pedophiles and whatnot and I'm always right, my intuition has never once been wrong about the guilt (or lack thereof) of people I see lying etc - not just IRL, but also on TV - and my ridiculous accuracy is actually a trait I'm prized for amongst my friends and families who will send me clips of people and ask me questions to see what I think of them, see if they're guilty of murder etc etc all the usual stuff.. in this fashion, I suppose people take advantage of me but it's nice to know I have at least one redeeming trait.

Something about me tends to attract other people, whether I want this attention or not doesn't seem to matter, and because of this, I always feel other people want to cut me down for no real reason - something similar to tall poppy syndrome, except it's completely unwarranted - this has been something that's permeated my entire life, it's inescapable.
Where I get stopped by strangers at the shop and told I'm "the golden child", someone else wants to see me trip over my shoelaces.
I can't explain this, however I've read something like this is an Ni dominant "thing" - I wouldn't have a clue why - my guess is it's some kind of attraction/repulsion with regards to that air of confidence/arrogance Ni doms carry around with them (even though I don't _feel_ it).

My Ni, if viewed as a detachment from reality of some sort (which it basically is) - i.e thoughts that aren't based in the past, present, nor future - is so strong, so overwhelmingly powerful, that I fail to identify it in other people and can have issues typing people as Ni types because I just gloss over what other people see as "Ni" as nothingness, just words - common sense. The usual.
In fact this is the reason I failed to identify it in myself for a while - when I'd read about imagery/symbolism etc, I just figured these questions or descriptors meant something _more_.. it didn't click that _this_ was what was going on in my head, when it finally did click, well fucking finally, all the pieces fell into place.




Anyway, I'll STFU now, I just figured that since this was a thread, for whatever reason - that I should chime in and explain what type I prefer, I like trying on new hat - it helps me get a feel for their functions for some reason - but I realise whatever understandings I come up with, will all be via an Ni perspective.
I am totally open to alternate typings etc though - I just don't believe in boxing yourself into any one particular type and closing the lid, sounds like a shitty narrow-minded idea, to me.

I know this post makes me come across as the worlds most self-absorbed wanker but I mean holy shit, someone made an entire thread about my type, I had to explain why I'm an INFJ, in some way, haha.

My apologies to anyone who gets an image in their head of someone smiling at themselves in a hand-held mirror with golden trimmings and beautiful, long, flowing hair. That wasn't my intention.


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

I would've thought INTP. Allow me to lay it out for y'all.

1. Turi has L from _Death Note_ for an avatar.
2. L is the biggest INTP in fiction there ever was.
3. Turi obviously looks up to L and seeks to emulate him in everything he says and does.
4. Therefore @Turi is an INTP.

In all seriousness, I would buy any of the four IN types for him.


----------



## spaceynyc (Feb 18, 2017)

I think your enneagram is what makes it hard for you to settle on INFJ @Turi

being a 5w6 is what makes you not seem like the typical INFJ by any means and led a lot of us, me included into feel like you're a thinking type. but 5w6 INFJ - that combinations clears up a lot of confusion for me about your type. Also 514 is definitely a INxJ tritype for sure. I think I may be that same tritype even though I have no idea in which order.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

this thread is making me LOL

I thought there was going to be a poll too!!


----------



## nep2une (Jun 15, 2017)

@Turi I think your post on Si-doms was actually a good example of your _~Ni-ness~_. Si-doms all seemed to be skeptical of it to an extent as well. They weren't really wanting to ride along completely with what you were proposing and it seemed like they viewed it as being a bit "out-there".


----------



## Jeffrei (Aug 23, 2016)

Umm... are we supposed to be questioning his type like this? I thought there was a rule against this somewhere.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

spaceynyc said:


> I think your enneagram is what makes it hard for you to settle on INFJ @Turi
> 
> being a 5w6 is what makes you not seem like the typical INFJ by any means and led a lot of us, me included into feel like you're a thinking type. but 5w6 INFJ - that combinations clears up a lot of confusion for me about your type. Also 514 is definitely a INxJ tritype for sure. I think I may be that same tritype even though I have no idea in which order.


I only really test as a 5w4, except on the similarminds one, where I typed as a Type 9 (first time I ever heard about Enneagram) - which I ran with for about a month or two, I think, mistype imo - I remember taking another Enneagram test shortly afterwards (same day) and getting Type 5.

I switched to 5w6 recently because someone suggested it, and I was made aware that 5w4 results are thrown out like candy in online tests, which made me skeptical which in itself is kind of a 6ish thing?

From what I've seen of your posts, I'm not sure about the Type 1 - you don't really come across with that kind of vibe.
Type 1s as I understand them have a bit of a perfectionistic/arrogance streak about them. 
I might even be a 1w9 core.




Soul Kitchen said:


> I would've thought INTP. Allow me to lay it out for y'all.
> 
> 1. Turi has L from _Death Note_ for an avatar.
> 2. L is the biggest INTP in fiction there ever was.
> ...


I was considering making my avatar this:









But I thought that might have been taking it too far, lol.




neptune_faced said:


> @Turi I think your post on Si-doms was actually a good example of your _~Ni-ness~_. Si-doms all seemed to be skeptical of it to an extent as well. They weren't really wanting to ride along completely with what you were proposing and it seemed like they viewed it as being a bit "out-there".


Some Si doms dug it though, that post was nowhere near where I think Si actually goes.

One thing I believe could be attributed to Si is this:
Detecting Unidentified Changes

Essentially it's just about people having some kind of "6th sense", that feeling of knowing something is off even if they can't identify what is off - and it seeks to prove this is a common phenomenon, not attributed to any kind of psychic bullshit, it's just the way the brain processes information - lots of information at once, and it's attention is drawn to stronger features etc rather than subtleties, but it still picks up subtle differences under your level of conscious perception.

Of course, I might be wrong here, and be blending dominant Ni and inferior Se, into my understandings of Si - I'm completely aware of this.


Have a read of this and tell me it doesn't sound like it could be connected to either Si or Ni, in the way it seems to filter out additional information:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N2pc


..and, from here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19580382


> Recently, it has been debated whether changes in visual scenes can be detected ("sensed") without a corresponding perception of the changing object ("seeing") and whether these phenomena build on fundamentally different perceptual processes (...)
> 
> Although the visual awareness negativity (VAN)/selection negativity was similar for detection with and without identification, a change-related positivity and the N2pc contralateral to changes were found exclusively when the change was fully identified.
> 
> ...


This certainly sounds like something one could attribute to Ni-Se to me, however something about the whole idea just "fits" with how I imagine Si to work. I can't really explain why.
Keen to hear from Si doms about this.

--

I'm also wondering whether Si users rely more on explicit memory than Ni users, as explicit memory requires conscious thought - and the way in which Si works - where the user is focusing on their own subjective impressions of a thing, is surely a conscious process, ergo this just makes sense to me. Need to work on this idea.. it certainly ties in beautifully with how episodic memory and semantic memory work.

This then makes me wonder whether Ni users are more reliant on implicit memory than Si users, as implicit memory is unconscious, and the way in which procedural memory works might help explain why Ni user appear to just 'know' things - when in actuality, it may be that their Ni is working off of 'priming' and procedural memory, perhaps in combination, in the back of their minds - this idea certainly sounds like "connecting the dots" to me. 

These ideas, of course, would actually support the above re: N2pc being more in favour of something Ni-Se might prefer, but eh.
I might be mixing Si and Ni to some degree, I'm not sure.

Perhaps it's hard for me to understand Si for what it truly is, as my dominant function is Ni, so I keep adding Ni into everything I think/understand about Si, because I'm trying to comprehend an _alternate introverted perceiving function_ to my own.


----------



## BiggyBigOne (Oct 22, 2017)

I would hate it if someone made a whole thread about me and exposing my secret


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

BiggyBigOne said:


> I would hate it if someone made a whole thread about me and exposing my secret


Yeah, haha, it is weird.


----------



## Igor (May 26, 2010)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> A lot of the time it is. Assuming everyone makes an effort to put some online persona that is different from their "actual personality" (what does that even mean?) is just silly. I am good example, the only difference from my "online" and ""real"" persona is that I am more talkative in the internet.


A decent point, but you also illustrate what I was angling for. We aren't presenting ourselves the same way online that we would in person, either by being more talkative, more combative, more opinionated, etc. I'm not necessarily saying people "create" or even curate their image online, but given the impersonal and ultimately antisocial qualities of interweb interactions, it stands to reason that certain aspects of ourselves will filter to the top, whereas in our everyday lives they would be constrained by the much more tactile realities of life.


----------



## Xcopy (Dec 10, 2016)

Igor said:


> Because obviously all Ts are hyperlogical demitrolls from the future, while all Fs are clearly faekind flowersniffers from beyond time itself. Duh.
> 
> Joking aside, I'm of the camp that it's just too easy to assume that online persona = actual personality. Which isn't true. Plus, for some reason I've noticed in the world of typology that there's a real reticence to think of someone who prefers a feeling function over a thinking function as being capable of acting, how to phrase this politely, provocative. I've also got a side theory about how interacting via a forum setting doesn't actively engage an extraverted judging function the way doing so in public would, hence leading to a reliance on introverted judging functions instead, which would explain the Ti vibe that people may be picking up on from you. But it's really just a crazy theory that's bounced around in my head off and on for a while, and probably isn't worth the neurons it's written on.


I believe you have a point, but I'm going to assume the psychological perspective of introversion and extroversion which focuses more on how you view matters. If you spend more time focusing on matters within yourself/focusing on yourself more, as opposed to focusing on external matters more, which firmly puts me in the extrovert camp.If you wanted to be realistic, I could say this much about myself: There are times I think of myself as an introvert, until I am around actual introverts and come off as an extrovert, and I think I am an extrovert until I am around actual extroverts. It's easy to see the line when it's clear, but there are such things as blurs between the two.


----------



## Rydori (Aug 7, 2017)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> A lot of the time it is. Assuming everyone makes an effort to put some online persona that is different from their "actual personality" (what does that even mean?) is just silly. I am good example, the only difference from my "online" and ""real"" persona is that I am more talkative in the internet.


I mean it is quite easy to fake personas on the internet rather on real life. After all in real life your reading just a text of letters and not fully communicating with them as you are not using body language which is a big hint to someones true persona. Unless you video call them constantly then a person's real identity can be hidden and silent. On the internet, there's usually people with different personas compared to their actual real life personalities.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> Not here to question your type, but you do come off as a thinker. INTP, in particular.


Why INTP?
Just a vibe?



Igor said:


> Because obviously all Ts are hyperlogical demitrolls from the future, while all Fs are clearly faekind flowersniffers from beyond time itself. Duh.
> 
> Joking aside, I'm of the camp that it's just too easy to assume that online persona = actual personality. Which isn't true. Plus, for some reason I've noticed in the world of typology that there's a real reticence to think of someone who prefers a feeling function over a thinking function as being capable of acting, how to phrase this politely, provocative. I've also got a side theory about how interacting via a forum setting doesn't actively engage an extraverted judging function the way doing so in public would, hence leading to a reliance on introverted judging functions instead, which would explain the Ti vibe that people may be picking up on from you. But it's really just a crazy theory that's bounced around in my head off and on for a while, and probably isn't worth the neurons it's written on.


Yeah, I'm with you - doesn't it make sense that an F type would be *more* provocative, though, as they'd be looking to get people on their side, or include other people somehow, or even just be a little trolly because that's what they feel like doing, or come across as troll-like and provocative because they won't back down from something etc etc there's like a million reasons I can think of that F types could come across as provocative.

Completely agree that what we see on internet forums isn't reflective of how a person extraverts themselves - I've thought this for well, years before I knew what MBTI even was - everybody jumps on and becomes a keyboard warrior, they all magically possess like a PhD in debating every topic of all time, they harbour all of the knowledge known to man (and more) - but in real life, you're met with "hey man, you want a drink?"

There's a huge difference between real persona and internet/forum persona, irl - I'm slightly different - IRL I'd come across as basically a friendly outcast, of sorts - and if I was in a mood where I didn't want to go home (which is my default state) then I'd be almost like.. an Fe dominant, to other people.
I put on basically an ISTP front, of sorts, pretty much all the time when out and about. I'm sure I've nailed the ISTP squint as well, just for effect.

How can communicating on an internet forum possibly expose a persons extraverted functions anyway - for me, there's no other people to gauge, no other people for me to be perceiving - I can't see how someone is and accommodate for that on an internet forum etc body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, the whole lot - I'm aware of all of this when communicating IRL and I accommodate accordingly, I can tell when someone is bored, or annoyed etc etc, online, we have access to none of this information (well, via forums, anyway).

I'd be keen to hear your theory.



Xcopy said:


> I'm sure, everyone else has their reasons, but I more or less get the feeling that the way you proceed comes off more T-ish than F-ish. To use the names, I would say I see you are more of a rational than an idealist, which works pretty well for me.


This baffles me, I must admit.
I wish I was a T type, sometimes - even before I learnt about MBTI, I used to think.. wonder how it would be if I just didn't accommodate for everyone else and just went with like, the facts.. things like.. years ago, my flat-mate asked me if she could get a cat, and I said yes.

I can clearly recall saying 'yeah, no worries' basically immediately - but in my head, I had these thoughts, pretty much simultaneously:

"I'll wind up with it after she moves out with her boyfriend, won't be able to afford it at the moment, we live on a dangerous corner, where will it sleep after she goes? The garage seems a bit dodgy.. hopefully just on the couch.. Is she going to get it everything it needs? What do I do after she moves out, leaves me with the cat, and then I want to move or otherwise don't want the cat? Take it to the pound? What if it's a girl? It needs to be sterilised or neutered or whatever they do. I think I might even be allergic to cats. Man, really not keen on having a cat atm.."

Consider all of the above, as a single thought that came and went within about 2 seconds, accompanied by imagery of me having to deal with a water rat that's been dismembered and scattered all across the kitchen floor - this image would be due to the fact that we lived right next to a little river that had rats in it - and also accompanied by the cat (which I'd never seen) curled up on the floor at night time next to me, who lives alone, playing video games out in the lounge room.

So even though I knew getting the cat would be a poor decision on my part, because I'd be left alone with it (this prophecy was fulfilled -_-).. I still said "yeah, no worries", because I knew what it meant to her, and that it would make her happy.
No I wasn't interested sexually or anything like that.

I'm a straight up F re: making decisions.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Turi said:


> I can't be INFJ and 5w4.
> That's too rare.
> I'd be a shiny.


_Not_ saying you're a 5w4 because it's too special or trendy is the same as deciding to say you _are_ that type because it's special/trendy 

Just say what type you think you are honestly-- who cares if it's supposedly unique/too special? Personally I've never been aware of any difference between 5w6 and 5w4 in terms of how people view them. Personally I tend to just ignore peoples' wings anyway.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

charlie.elliot said:


> _Not_ saying you're a 5w4 because it's too special or trendy is the same as deciding to say you _are_ that type because it's special/trendy
> 
> Just say what type you think you are honestly-- who cares if it's supposedly unique/too special? Personally I've never been aware of any difference between 5w6 and 5w4 in terms of how people view them. Personally I tend to just ignore peoples' wings anyway.


Yeah, true.

If I was to just lay out what _I_ think I am, from my own research, it would be as follows (and I've updated all my information to reflect this already).

*MBTI dichotomy:* INFP - P, because, I'm an introverted perceiver, and I know this about myself. I am not an 'introverted judging' type. I don't actually see a reason to question the INF preferences, honestly, lol. I know people see me as a T type, but they're just wrong, plain and simple.

*MBTI Step II Facets:* 
E-I - Receiving, Contained, Intimate, Reflective, Quiet. All Introverted facets.
S-N - Abstract, Imaginative, Conceptual, Theoretical, Original. All Intuitive facets.
T-F - Empathetic, Compassionate, Questioning=Accomodating, Accepting, Tender. Mostly F facets outside of Questioning, which I'd choose over Accommodating at gun-point.
J-P - Casual, Planful, Early Starting=Pressure-Prompted, Scheduled, Emergent. Even J/P, if forced at gun-point I'd choose Pressure-Prompted over Early Starting, I think.. this is a tough one for me. Even.

*Functions:* Ni-F-T-Se - reflective of the INFJ cognitive functions. Supports MBTI INFP, _imo_. I've thought pretty seriously about this, because I believe I lean more Fi than Fe, but I know I'm an Ni dominant, and lean more F over T, so I haven't actually got a choice here. Restrictive system is restrictive. I'm practically locked into the INFJ stack, as far as I'm concerned.

*Enneagram:* 5w4 4w5 1w9. Always open to more information on Enneagram, though, I truly feel I'm a 5w4 - but I'm hesitant, because everybody is a 5w4 according to online tests, but I'm more of a noob with Enneagram than I am with MBTI and function theory.

*Enneagram Instincts:* so/sp/sx - I used to believe I was an sx/sp - however upon actually researching the instincts, I found I was sorely mistaken, and almost didn't resonate with sx at all - and found I was clearly an so 'dominant' - this surprised me.

*Socionics:* IEI-Ni - it's the only type that is a complete fit. I resonate with both ILI subtypes more than the IEI-Fe subtype, however I do believe it's stupid to use that as reasoning for a preference for ILI, when the #1 fit is IEI-Ni.

I believe all of the above to be true, and to be 'best-fits' even though INFP contradicts my official MBTI typing of INFJ, and prior self-typing via step II facets as INFJ.

I've introspected and really had a think about what is _natural_ for me, rather than what I _do_ because what I actually _do_ can be connected with external influences i.e how I think I should be, etc etc - I believe I this may have skewed my results in the past - at heart, my natural preference and default 'state' is that of a perceiver.

I have to admit, as awkward as the premise of this thread is - it's been helpful - because it's sort of forced me to examine things a little more and develop a deeper understanding of how things work, because I want to clear it up.
Which I obviously can't do, until I have a firm grasp on it all.

I'd be super keen to have a thread where everyone basically just does what I just did - brief introspection of themselves and type up the where they sit in various systems.

Anyway, hopefully this post puts the nail in the coffin, so to speak.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> Why INTP?
> Just a vibe?


The way you take something apart and reconstruct it, in order to have an understanding, your own understanding of it. Your thought process, or at least the pieces and bits that one can infer from your posts are very Ti, in my opinion.

You can also jump from topic to topic randomly, which could be Ne, but perhaps that is just Ni? Ni is weird.

Also, you can sometimes be tactless, as someone mentioned. That is not exclusive to thinkers, of course; INFPs, in particular, are often, from my experience with them, some of the coldest people... But what if?

It could be mostly a vibe, too, though. I mean, you think I am a feeler and I might not be, after all. Why feeler for me?

Again, not questioning your type, just responding to your question.


----------



## Xcopy (Dec 10, 2016)

Turi said:


> This baffles me, I must admit.
> I wish I was a T type, sometimes - even before I learnt about MBTI, I used to think.. wonder how it would be if I just didn't accommodate for everyone else and just went with like, the facts.. things like.. years ago, my flat-mate asked me if she could get a cat, and I said yes.
> 
> I can clearly recall saying 'yeah, no worries' basically immediately - but in my head, I had these thoughts, pretty much simultaneously:
> ...


Hmm. I can admit, looking at it from this angle, I can see it. I'm inclined to agree more with @Hugging Wabbits though, that you're certainly a Ti user. I found myself thinking, I would probably point out the issues to them before just agreeing with them albeit in a more polite, diplomatic manner, but I'm going to assume that's the difference between having an introverted function first as opposed to an extroverted one. It sounds as if talking to others is similar to peeking outside of a room before immediately returning to your internal process. One possibility that I considered while I was out, was that it's possible that you use your Ti more here, along with your Ni.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> The way you take something apart and reconstruct it, in order to have an understanding, your own understanding of it. Your thought process, or at least the pieces and bits that one can infer from your posts are very Ti, in my opinion.
> 
> You can also jump from topic to topic randomly, which could be Ne, but perhaps that is just Ni? Ni is weird.
> 
> ...


I don't really think I'm tactless, I hold back a lot.
I don't think I jump from topic to topic randomly either, lol.

For you - yeah, honestly, mostly just a vibe but it builds up - your recent 'type me' thread only strengthened the F, lol.



Xcopy said:


> Hmm. I can admit, looking at it from this angle, I can see it. I'm inclined to agree more with @Hugging Wabbits though, that you're certainly a Ti user. I found myself thinking, I would probably point out the issues to them before just agreeing with them albeit in a more polite, diplomatic manner, but I'm going to assume that's the difference between having an introverted function first as opposed to an extroverted one. It sounds as if talking to others is similar to peeking outside of a room before immediately returning to your internal process. One possibility that I considered while I was out, was that it's possible that you use your Ti more here, along with your Ni.


I don't think I use T anything much at all, it's really interesting that other people see me as a T type of some sort, I feel like I'm pretty much as NF as it gets, lol.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> I don't really think I'm tactless, I hold back a lot.
> I don't think I jump from topic to topic randomly either, lol.
> 
> For you - yeah, honestly, mostly just a vibe but it builds up - your recent 'type me' thread only strengthened the F, lol.
> ...


What you think and what others think of you are often not the same thing.

That is fine. No one has been able to explain auxiliary Ne to me in a way that I can relate to, so for now I am sticking to ISTJ.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> What you think and what others think of you are often not the same thing.
> 
> That is fine. No one has been able to explain auxiliary Ne to me in a way that I can relate to, so for now I am sticking to ISTJ.


I'm not sure whether anyone can explain auxiliary anything, and support it with any kind of credible evidence or research.

What about ISxx v INxx?


I'll humour you with some 'cognitive function' crap - you look out your window and see this:










Thoughts?


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> I'm not sure whether anyone can explain auxiliary anything, and support it with any kind of credible evidence or research.
> 
> What about ISxx v INxx?
> 
> ...


Alright, you are against auxiliary and tertiary functions. What about inferior Te?

I will get to the pic soon.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> Alright, you are against auxiliary and tertiary functions. What about inferior Te?
> 
> I will get to the pic soon.


I'm not *against* auxiliary functions, I acknowledge and accept the official MBTI folks subscribe to the theory of dom-aux-tert-inf.
They don't subscribe to the tertiary function being in the direction of the dominant though.

My hang-up atm is, that the official MBTI test doesn't actually test the cognitive functions, rather it test the dichotomy, and then the functions just get sorta.. put there? I don't know.
I don't feel like typing via cognitive functions has much research or credibility, whereas typing by dichotomy does - though like I said, I do acknowledge the official MBTI folks *do* subscribe to the types having dominant, auxiliary functions, etc..

From my official MBTI test result:



> In the first half of life, INFJs usually:
> 
> Focus on their favorite process, Intuition, and conceptualizing ideas, having insights about people, and visualizing possibilities
> 
> ...


This clearly indicates that officially, an INFJ favours intuition first, then feeling second, then thinking, then sensing - in that order.
I'm also aware that in addition to that, the official MBTI folks do indeed subscribe to 'type dynamics' i.e, an INFJ leading with Ni etc etc
https://www.cppasiapacific.com/content/Quick_Tips/Tips_Cracking-the-Code-or-Type-Dynamics-101.pdf

So, I can get behind talk of dominant and auxiliary functions etc - how useful this is, with regards to actually _typing_ someone, is up in the air, imo - because the dichotomy is what has the research behind it, not the functions.
They don't get into 'tertiary' functions at all so I'm of the belief that the official 'type dynamics' model for an INFJ would essentially be Ni-Fe-T-Se, and *imo* I would actually put Te in that position for me, if forced to choose between Ti and Te, as something that is unconscious/inferior etc as the 'tertiary' and inferior functions are, i.e a weak spot.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Total fucken INFx

This whole coy what am I, is he or isn't he dance alone screams INF

"Oh no not mwah, couldn't be, but could be"


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Sensational said:


> Total fucken INFx
> 
> This whole coy what am I, is he or isn't he dance alone screams INF
> 
> "Oh no not mwah, couldn't be, but could be"


I don't invite the discussions, I find it really awkward to have an 8 page thread about my type in the Myers Briggs section, lol.

I prefer to chime in on other peoples types, lol.


----------



## Xcopy (Dec 10, 2016)

Turi said:


> I'm not sure whether anyone can explain auxiliary anything, and support it with any kind of credible evidence or research.


*Dom-* The function that leads you the most. 
*Aux-* The function that seeks to support and direct you as a person. Tries to keep you on track. 
*Tert-*The relief function, the one you use in your spare time and enjoy yourself with. Also called the temptation function, because it's the one outside of your Dom function that you flow naturally into the most. Thus makes it easy to loop into with little difficulty. 
*Inferior-*The function that you can slip into under stress that can make you act out of character so to speak. Also, the function you tend to be attracted to in others, because it's such an opposite towards your dom function, so coming across someone whom uses it can be both off-putting yet highly intriguing. 

I can use myself as an example. 

*Dom Fe:* I tend to listen to other people more and take their words into consideration, I'm often respectful and compromising. 
*Aux Ni:* While I use it enough to plan ahead, make predictions, and can lose myself in a slew of information, Ni makes me focus more on future and tries to keep me on focusing ahead. It tries to keep me responsible. 
*Tert Se:* The function that makes me want to travel, move around, and enjoy various sensor activities. Especially if it's with other people more.Turns me into someone whom enjoys making jokes, and causes me to have more focus on external features more, and instead of thinking about my future, I end up enjoying immediate gratifications without considering the consequences. 
*Inferior Ti: *Makes me highly critical of other people, and whatever is causing me stress, to the point where it becomes nitpicky at times. Unfortunately, it also makes me dislike dissecting people to that level, instead I prefer a sort of curious fascination at best, with people. 

The information is out there, and I am aware it's up to the person in general to figure out who or what they are, as they would only know best more than any others.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

I know what they are.
I mean, supported by credible research, rather than anecdotal evidence.


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Guys, guys. We agree Turi’s a Ti user but in what position is the key here? Do you really think it’s dom or aux Ti vs tert Ti? If so, please explain why or why not. 

I think tert Ti fits. There seems to always be an agenda, not necessarily hidden. Doesn’t seem to just be for the sake of making sense of things. Seems to be coming from a hunch or belief and trying to prove (or disprove it), always saying stuff like “oh but I could be wrong”. Always seeking validation from others and then processing the info after. However, there’s a consistent agenda behind it.


----------



## Igor (May 26, 2010)

Turi said:


> How can communicating on an internet forum possibly expose a persons extraverted functions anyway - for me, there's no other people to gauge, no other people for me to be perceiving - I can't see how someone is and accommodate for that on an internet forum etc body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, the whole lot - I'm aware of all of this when communicating IRL and I accommodate accordingly, I can tell when someone is bored, or annoyed etc etc, online, we have access to none of this information (well, via forums, anyway).
> 
> I'd be keen to hear your theory.


That's actually the gist of my crackpot idea. The basic idea is that since the communication occurs in such an impersonal form, and as you stated, is informed by whatever lead perceiving function a person is using, it becomes difficult to, say, fully utilize Fe or Te in a satisfactory (to the unconscious self, that is) manner. And when you can't flex the function you want to use, especially if it's the auxiliary, then you by default will try to use the tertiary instead. Being that in the case of introvert dominants their tertiary will match directions, the person posting basically has the conversation in their head. It becomes an exercise of a solipsistic nature, leading to what others might deem a "loop" (always disliked how overused that line of thought is) to complete the unconscious transaction that the extravterted auxiliary function just can't quite finish, as it were.

I do think that, if the people communicating have established a rapport, that it is much much easier for that extraverted function to fire, because you've got a context to work with. You can read what they've written and put their voice in your mind, see their face as they "speak" to you. Talking with strangers? Not so much. It's been proven that people will be much more vicious with those they don't know on the internet, but once they recognize the other person's humanity, they can suddenly go from troll to civil.

I dunno if any of that makes much sense, because it's still quite a nebulous thing floating in my brain. Like I said, it's my crackpot theory to explain how people can so easily "miss the mark" when it comes to understanding and connecting with people online. It's also why I hate online dating with a passion and a fury (yeah, that's why I hate it; not my crippling anxiety whatsoever; yeah.)


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

ISFP, can't think abstractly, reacts emotionally, doesn't have even a rudimentary understanding of how logic and evidence work.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Aluminum Frost said:


> ISFP, can't think abstractly, reacts emotionally, doesn't have even a rudimentary understanding of how logic and evidence work.


Unfortunately, I had to view this post - I do have you blocked.
I've reported this post, and another post of yours in which you're basically trying to cyber-bully me.
I don't appreciate the attempts to cyber-bully me through youtube, either.

However - this whole scenario has provided me with some useful information, about you.

- You're definitely an SP type - when you feel like you're unimpressive (i.e the whole thread where I slayed you with facts and data, and you tried to just troll me - knowing fully well, that you have been defeated), or are being ignored (your games ramped up after finding out you'd been blocked) - you do anything to get the attention back onto yourself, this includes resorting to cyberbullying tactics on this forum, venturing off to youtube to continue with the assault etc - this is all "look at me! look at me! look what I can do! hahaha!" - and when caught, you attempt to flip the blame onto the other party.

Now, should my reports be seen and you be threatened with a ban, or any sort of punishment - I know, beyond any and all doubt - that your response would be "I don't care" or something _extremely_ similar - OR - it will be a complete con-job response along the lines of "Oh, I'm sorry! I'll definitely never do anything like that again" - practically you saying anything - including making promises you don't intend to keep - to avoid reprimand.

The above has outlined numerous variants of the game SP types play when they fear they're losing the ability to be free (i.e free to deny facts), to be graceful and to be impressive - it's the game of Blackmail - according to _Survival Games: Personality Play_ by Eve DeLunas.. playing these games is to prevent the SP type from further loss of self-esteem, self-confidence and self-respect - and you've clearly displayed the Delinquency, Con-Artist, Outrage and Shocking variants.

So, viewing you from that perspective, it's clear to see you play those games essentially as a "power play" of sorts - you're trying to get the upper hand on somebody who threatens your ego - you're trying to show how 'powerful' you are by attacking me on youtube, and here on PerC.
Of course, in doing so - the SP types wind up losing *more* respect and wind up looking *disgraceful*.

Not that there was ever any doubt - but you're accurately typed as an SP type.


However, there is a discrepancy - you're not a Thinker.
Read any descriptor of ISTPs out - they're "cool-headed problem solvers".. cool-headed? Aluminum Frost?
Why, this feels like an oxymoron.
Clean denying facts, when presented with them - supports Thinking as your inferior function (and therefore, your weakest function - what I'm saying, is that you fail at Thinking - it's your _least preferred_ method of making decisions - it's something you're _not good at_).

According to _Was That Really Me?_ from Naomi Quenk - Introverted Feeling types may be concerned about their intellectual abilities, often viewing others as smarter and more knowledgeable than themselves. Due to being a little uneasy with regards to their logical analysis skills - the Introverted Feeling types tend to be hypersensitive to "illogic" and "inaccuracy" in others.

Naomi also notes that these types tend to be somewhat disdainful of people who "act quickly on the basis of insufficient information" - tell me, is this not _exactly you_ with regards to the information I provided? You wanted more ground to be covered, you trolled me and asked "how do you know they're not all mistypes" - now, rather than berate you for how immensely ludicrous this question and train of thought is - I'll instead suggest that this is due to the Introverted Feeling types preference for a more careful, restrained and reflective approach to solving problems - which I can understand and see value in.

This is all a projection of your inferior Extraverted Thinking - and it's important to note, that all of this began after I critiqued your argument - IOW - an inferior Extraverted Thinking stress 'trigger'.
..and, it ties in beautifully to the SP games I mentioned above.


I don't feel the need to go any further here with you - but I'm happy to, if you'd like - I believe it's clear as day, that you're an ISFP, rather than an ISTP - and I think you are projecting your inner frustrations and dislikes with regards to Feelers, or perhaps even ISFPs in general - onto me, in these efforts to type me as an ISFP.

You fighting with me, is symbolic of a battle with your own inner demons.
I can respect that. 

I look forward to you overcoming them, perhaps we can enjoy more fruitful discussions down the track.

Until then, all the best and Merry Christmas.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

Turi said:


> Unfortunately, I had to view this post - I do have you blocked.
> I've reported this post, and another post of yours in which you're basically trying to cyber-bully me.
> I don't appreciate the attempts to cyber-bully me through youtube, either.
> 
> ...


You've insulted me like 10 times, i'm just stating facts, wasn't an insult, I've reported you multiple times, get over yourself kid.

1. Your "evidence" wasn't actually evidence. Like 5 people had to explain to you but you were too dense to understand. Not even Ocean Helm agreed with you. Your "evidence" wasn't evidence because my point was the people claiming to be intuitives in your polls might not even be intuitives, they may be mistypes. I kept pointing out all your logical fallacies. All you could do was throw a temper tantrum and refuse to respond, writing off anyone that disagrees with you as simply being ridiculous. So by definition you're unreasonable. This is also an ad hominem argument, trying to discredit me cause I'm an SP would be like me saying you're illogical cause you're a feeler or unrealistic cause you're intuitive (oh so you think at least)

2. You've insulted me and a few other people like 10 times, is there something mentally wrong with you Turi?

3. You can't read minds, and what's your evidence of this? Me disagreeing with you? You're so dogmatic, enough with the pathological nonsense, you're talking clean out your arse.

4. See 3.

5. You refuse to debate anyone who disagrees with you, I was calm and patient with you up until you started insulting me. You outright said to soop "I dismiss everything you just said as bullshit" you're a feeler dude. I can't deny facts if you haven't presented any.

6. You said a few days ago that functions have no evidence but now you're using someones interpretation of them as evidence and projecting it onto me cause #Logic I guess.

7. Dude, you're the one getting emotional and Red Panda said that you're being egotistical so you're kinda projecting right now.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Aluminum Frost said:


> ISFP, can't think abstractly, reacts emotionally, doesn't have even a rudimentary understanding of how logic and evidence work.


... Are you serious?


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

Blue Ribbon said:


> ... Are you serious?


It's not a slight against ISFPs, he just fits a lot of negative stereotypes. And he keeps calling me an idiot among other things cause he has no argument.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Mmm.. no, I don't like that word.
I wouldn't have called you an idiot.

I did get myself a good old Boxing Day chuckle out of your last response.
It's like you're trying your hardest to fit inferior Extraverted Thinking.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Okay, so based off of what I've seen of @Turi so far, I would say he comes off as an aux Fe user. It's quite obvious to me, I don't know why anyone would mistake that. I can even point out my exact reasons for saying so. 

I don't mean this negatively, but it's fairly obvious to me that Turi's relationship with Te is that it is his PoLR function in Socionics. There's no way it can be his dual seeking (inferior) function. With the way he reacted to his research being questioned just screams of PoLR Te. 

Then there's the issue of N vs S, which, tho I can't make any solid arguments for that, I would say N over S, simply Because ISFJs don't communicate in the way that he does. He seems to have the Se push to him, his focus is narrowed a lot more. When you're in a debate with an SFJ, the repressed Ne just comes out. We tend to be overall more unsure of ourselves than the NFJs. I know it may be just a facade that he has and maybe he's really an ISFJ, but I think INFJ is more likely. 

So can we settle the typeism thing? 

(I know I probably shouldn't get involved, but fuck it, I'm an ESFJ E2, I almost can't help it)


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

Turi said:


> Mmm.. no, I don't like that word.
> I wouldn't have called you an idiot.
> 
> I did get myself a good old Boxing Day chuckle out of your last response.
> It's like you're trying your hardest to fit inferior Extraverted Thinking.


You don't respond to arguments and claim to be right after people poke holes in your logic. You don't rely on reasoning but statistics which are flawed and when they're debunked you flip out. That's inferior Te. Also you're dominant Fi cause you take disagreement personally, can't see past your own bias and don't give a shit about external harmony so you can't have strong Fe. Thanks for playing kid. Don't get emotional and block me again lmao xD


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Okay, so based off of what I've seen of @Turi so far, I would say he comes off as an aux Fe user. It's quite obvious to me, I don't know why anyone would mistake that. I can even point out my exact reasons for saying so.
> 
> I don't mean this negatively, but it's fairly obvious to me that Turi's relationship with Te is that it is his PoLR function in Socionics. There's no way it can be his dual seeking (inferior) function. With the way he reacted to his research being questioned just screams of PoLR Te.
> 
> ...


Hey, thanks for chipping in, lol.

PoLR Te:



> When confronted with a large body of factual information with which they are unacquainted, IEIs will often hesitate and refrain from saying anything so as to avoid appearing unknowledgeable or potentially embarrassing themselves. They may feel threatened and vacillate if pressured into producing critical evaluations of factual information or statistics; they may feel as though they do not know what to do with this type of information, and often prefer to rely on their internal conceptual framework use their understanding of the relevant processes to evaluate a situation. They may also be wary of basing their beliefs or actions on facts from outside sources, instead preferring to rely on their own insights. These behaviors can sometimes lead to confusion and lack of clarity, as they may have difficulty clearly explaining and underscoring the information pertinent their ideas.
> 
> They are often unconcerned with optimizing productivity or efficiency. They may generally try to avoid evaluating cost-effectiveness of resources, and are often not apt at making such discriminations. They may see persons who focus extensively on practical matters as boring and inanimate. They deeply dislike and can avoid tedious and disinteresting tasks that involve attention to detail and pragmatic focus, such as managing one's finances. They usually are exhausted by these tasks; they have no interest in and little idea how to do them, and often find it difficult to focus. They may be petulant and unresponsive in encounters with individuals who try to mobilize them into productive tasks, and may feel that such individuals are bossy and contemptible.
> 
> They may seem overly dreamy, lost in their own enterprises, and generally oblivious to the nature of the mundane tasks that surround them.


As frustrating as it is to agree to this - yes, this is accurate.

This is why my happenings with "facts" and "research" and "data" are short-lived - I can't be bothered with them, I ultimately don't see value in them, I prefer to go with my own inner understandings and perceptions.

Having to rely on external sources to 'prove a point' and what not, aggravates me. I don't see the point.
I just think "are you thick in the head? why do you not see what I see? who cares about 'facts' - fact is, what I'm saying is the truth"

I attributed my dislike of managing finances and avoiding tedious and disinteresting tasks to inferior Se.. "petulant and unresponsive" re: these kinds of things - well shit, that's me in a nutshell - it's too accurate and actually causes one-sided confrontations with my wife a lot of the time - whenever she wants to talk finances etc (she's an ESFJ btw) - she gets pissed off when I basically just ignore her and zone in on whatever I'm doing - I mean, completely ignore, btw - she's lucky to even get a response.

I realise this is childish and immature, but I know myself, and I know finances and all that kind of thing stresses me out _and bores me_ at the same time - it's a fruitless endeavour for me to engage in those discussions with anybody - however! I'm okay to do it _on my own_!
Everybody needs to F right off, if they want me to get those kinds of things done - because I can do it, and I can do it well, but I need complete solitude and by that I mean - I basically want her to take my daughter and herself out of the house - or let me just go for a walk or a drive away from the house - in order to process my thoughts and figure things out.

PoLR Te is a perfect fit. Good catch. It's unnervingly accurate and it's a huge flaw.
Something to work on. 
Which is difficult, because I genuinely only see value in it, in so far as people expect 'data' etc.. society expects certain things from a male - and a wife expects certain things from a husband - I myself, no, I hate it. Absolutely hate it. I don't see the point.
The 'real world' means nothing to me. I'm not moved by it and only feel compelled to source information etc to support my points of view because I know _other people_ want this. I don't. 


Re: communication - you raise a good point - people seem to forget that as INFJs lead with intuition, their gateway to the unconscious is sensing.
Here's a small cherry-picked snippet from the Se section:


> Some IEIs may be especially prone to enjoy such adventuresome sensations as lighthearted mischief or playful aggression.


Yes.

Actually everything in this link is accurate:
Socionics Types: IEI-INFp


Also, re: communication - it could even be the 'Fe' that is the source of some of what others see as aggression or hostility:


> IEIs can also direct their emotional influence through a mode of expression that limits their affable levity; they may take on a formal, toxic, serious, or even shock-jock emphasis as situations require.


From the Ni section:


> They can come across as fickle, indecisive and vapid, and their fantasies can be often esoteric; they often may seem idealistic and focused on unrealistic or other-worldly utopias. They also can demonstrate a lack of attentiveness to daily affairs, and sometimes a generally withdrawn, inactive deportment. At the same time, they sometimes can be prophetic, prescient, and profound in their visions, and sometimes reflect a far more rebellious, aggressive, or outspoken demeanor.


I realise IEI is INFP in MBTI terminology - that's actually what I resonate with re: MBTI dichotomy as well - I believe I'm INFP via MBTI dichotomy (slight P preference) and INFj, or IEI according to Socionics.

I've only got INFJ here as my type, to display the Socionics/functions based preference, because that's what everyone here "goes by".
Sometimes I switch it to INFP to reflect the MBTI but the song remains the same.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Well, I guess you can ignore my suggestion of revisiting INTJ then, @Turi. 

I wonder, in the case of an INTJ (or maybe ISTJ), what would the "point of least resistance" be? Fe?


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Reila said:


> Well, I guess you can ignore my suggestion of revisiting INTJ then, @Turi.
> 
> I wonder, in the case of an INTJ (or maybe ISTJ), what would the "point of least resistance" be? Fe?


Yeah, haha.

PoLR Fe (from here: Socionics Types: ILI-INTp)



> ILIs are typically out of touch with expressing their emotional states. They are often seen as cold, unresponsive, and undesiring of human contact (which is often not the case). As a consequence, ILIs tend to be somewhat reclusive and often feel out of touch with their social surroundings. The rules of social "games" are often not naturally understood by ILIs. The are often unconfident and uneasy in social settings, especially those in which they feel that are expected to abide by social conventions that they have little connection to such as tribesmanship or purposeless joviality. Additionally, ILIs tend to regard the development of trust with others with significant anxiety, fearing that their inner world or antisocial tendencies will be unfavorably looked upon by others, and that most of the good will and friendliness they see in others is a pretense of social interaction rather than an expression of genuine emotional reactions. Often ILIs eschew many social situations and neglect emotional association with groups, instead seeking deep emotional connections with individuals.
> 
> ILIs are often seen as especially negative, overly critical, and sometimes harsh in their judgments. This is in part because ILIs -- when serious -- tend to communicate in a direct, straightforward manner. They sometimes are unaware of others' reactions to their ideas and may avoid sugar-coating them. Many ILIs see their criticism as constructive and believe that they would be doing others no good by withholding their ideas. Because of their incessant criticism and negativism, ILIs are sometimes seen as haughty or arrogant.


You relate?


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Then there's the issue of N vs S, which, tho I can't make any solid arguments for that, I would say N over S, simply Because ISFJs don't communicate in the way that he does. He seems to have the Se push to him, his focus is narrowed a lot more. When you're in a debate with an SFJ, the repressed Ne just comes out. We tend to be overall more unsure of ourselves than the NFJs. I know it may be just a facade that he has and maybe he's really an ISFJ, but I think INFJ is more likely.


Ok, let's talk about Socionics in the MBTI section lol.

A Se push... from a Ni-ego? All sensers have strong Se. No intuitive does. This guy shows frequent and competent use of force with no appreciation of it from others. Plus suggesting a type with strong Ne is a real stretch. The guy has less perspective than the Ne PoLRs in this thread. I've never met a single intuitive who was dogmatic and I doubt I ever will - perspective gets in the way of dogmatism.

You want to see a real IEI, read through the old posts of Fenix in the Socionics section. Extremely gentle guy with very fluid and open ended opinions. As a Ni mobilizing, I could not get enough of him.



Aluminum Frost said:


> You don't respond to arguments and claim to be right after people poke holes in your logic. You don't rely on reasoning but statistics which are flawed and when they're debunked you flip out. That's inferior Te. Also you're dominant Fi cause you take disagreement personally, can't see past your own bias and don't give a shit about external harmony so you can't have strong Fe. Thanks for playing kid. Don't get emotional and block me again lmao xD


Fe concerns itself with objective values, not harmony. Turi is constantly adapting to the values and vibes around him. Fe is one of the most obvious functions he shows.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

AZH said:


> Ok, let's talk about Socionics in the MBTI section lol.
> 
> A Se push... from a Ni-ego? All sensers have strong Se. No intuitive does. This guy shows frequent and competent use of force with no appreciation of it from others. Plus suggesting a type with strong Ne is a real stretch. The guy has less perspective than the Ne PoLRs in this thread. I've never met a single intuitive who was dogmatic and I doubt I ever will - perspective gets in the way of dogmatism



I don't use "force" - it mystifies me that I come off this way on this internet forum.
Never been accused of that kind of crap in my life, I abhor it.


Re: dogmatic - well, you've never met an Ni dominant then, and this only comes out when I'm positive about something and other people are essentially "blind".

Re: narrow perspective - I lol at this because it's literally the opposite of me - however I also know that I _ don't _ have a narrow perspective nor do I come across as having a narrow perspective - and I know that it's supposed to be an insult, because you're blinded by your dislike for me.

I literally have PMs from people praising my perspectives and seeking my advice. 
I basically have a cue of people lined up with regards to this, and so as narrow as it might seem - I know you're wrong.

I don't appreciate the inherent jab at S types being unable of possessing a wider perspective, either, lol, what's that all about?

I would argue that I'm too open to new information and this is the cause of my indecisiveness at times, lol.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

AZH said:


> Ok, let's talk about Socionics in the MBTI section lol.
> 
> A Se push... from a Ni-ego? All sensers have strong Se. No intuitive does. This guy shows frequent and competent use of force with no appreciation of it from others. Plus suggesting a type with strong Ne is a real stretch. The guy has less perspective than the Ne PoLRs in this thread. I've never met a single intuitive who was dogmatic and I doubt I ever will - perspective gets in the way of dogmatism.
> 
> ...


I think he's just flippant, unsure what to believe. He's incredibly stubborn but whateves. You're right about him being dogmatic and unable to see other peoples perspective though. Just read through this thread. http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/1194289-mistyped-sensors-intuitives-mbti.html


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Turi said:


> Re: dogmatic - well, you've never met an Ni dominant then, and this only comes out when I'm positive about something and other people are essentially "blind".


I've met plenty, actually. Textbook Jungian types. Textbook Socionics types. I've been doing this for years. I'm not a newbie like you are. I've long since settled my grasp of typology. I've come across countless people who agree with me on how typology works. All of them knowledgeable people.

You see people as blind because you fail to see their perspective.



Turi said:


> Re: narrow perspective - I lol at this because it's literally the opposite of me - however I also know that I _ don't _ have a narrow perspective nor do I come across as having a narrow perspective - and I know that it's supposed to be an insult, because you're blinded by your dislike for me.


I must admit, I am starting to find you obnoxious. But it's because of your egoism in the previous thread, followed by you making up bullshit about me like this. If you didn't do either of those things, I would have no reason to dislike you whatsoever.

Beforehand, I actually quite liked you. I've always appreciated Fe.

Again, you're showing a lack of perspective. Rather than consider that my statements could be interpreted an alternative way, you only interpret it as me disliking you.



Turi said:


> I literally have PMs from people praising my perspectives and seeking my advice.


Showing strong perspective would be seeing that the facts you post can be interpreted multiple ways, which you clearly can't see. People seeking advice from you has nothing to do with you having perspective.



Turi said:


> I basically have a cue of people lined up with regards to this, and so as narrow as it might seem - I know you're wrong.


Welp, the Fe reasoning process in a nutshell.



Turi said:


> I don't appreciate the inherent jab at S types being unable of possessing a wider perspective, either, lol, what's that all about?


It's not a jab. It's a part of the core definition of Ne in Socionics to look at things from multiple perspectives. And I find it really, really funny that you're suggesting that I'm typist against sensers.



Turi said:


> I would argue that I'm too open to new information and this is the cause of my indecisiveness at times, lol.


Yes, I agree. That is your Fe. You treat everyone's opinion almost entirely equally. You don't have a lot of bias like Fi, nor do you do much ranking of people's competence like a thinker would.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

AZH said:


> I've met plenty, actually. Textbook Jungian types. Textbook Socionics types. I've been doing this for years. I'm not a newbie like you are. I've long since settled my grasp of typology. I've come across countless people who agree with me on how typology works. All of them knowledgeable people.


Fair enough. 
How long did it take you to "grasp" typology?





> I must admit, I am starting to find you obnoxious. But it's because of your egoism in the previous thread, followed by you making up bullshit about me like this. If you didn't do either of those things, I would have no reason to dislike you whatsoever.


Get in line - I'm not even being egotistical - people can't see the connections, the big picture - they're too concerned with trivial details and specifics, in that other thread. 

I've decided it's not my problem.




> Showing strong perspective would be seeing that the facts you post can be interpreted multiple ways, which you clearly can't see. People seeking advice from you has nothing to do with you having perspective.


If this is the argument against having a strong/wide perspective, you're mistaken and have the wrong idea of me in your head.

I know damn well each and every way the information I provided can be interpreted - I just settled on what imo is the most obvious one - I even critiqued the information myself in a post there, and exposed my mindset as essentially a defence mechanism.

I'm more aware than you think.
I see how everything is.




> Welp, the Fe reasoning process in a nutshell.


No comment.




> It's not a jab. It's a part of the core definition of Ne in Socionics to look at things from multiple perspectives. And I find it really, really funny that you're suggesting that I'm typist against sensers.


Well, it's the way you phrased your message.
I don't know you enough/at all. 
I wouldn't have a clue what biases etc you might possess.




> Yes, I agree. That is your Fe. You treat everyone's opinion almost entirely equally. You don't have a lot of bias like Fi, nor do you do much ranking of people's competence like a thinker would.


No arguments here.

I'm also aware I'm probably a little standoffish and negative ATM due to quitting my job and sorta half-stressing about finances etc.

Which as I already mentioned, stress me out anyway.

Totally aware of this.

Also thinking I should be more critical of the sources I receive information from. because it turns into a total mess sometimes, with contradictory information.. that makes it too easy to fall into unintentionally cherry-picking parts that fit my "hunch" etc.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

"Get in line - I'm not even being egotistical - people can't see the connections, the big picture - they're too concerned with trivial details and specifics, in that other thread. 

I've decided it's not my problem."

Grade A narcissism right here.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Aluminum Frost said:


> "Get in line - I'm not even being egotistical - people can't see the connections, the big picture - they're too concerned with trivial details and specifics, in that other thread.
> 
> I've decided it's not my problem."
> 
> Grade A narcissism right here.


Does this offend your personal values?


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

Turi said:


> Does this offend your personal values?


Is this what your idea of wit is? I was just calling you out on your bullshit as usual.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Aluminum Frost said:


> Is this what your idea of wit is? I was just calling you out on your bullshit as usual.


I just thought it was funny.


----------



## MusiCago (Jan 3, 2017)

I remember I helped Turi figure out he was an INFJ a while ago, but he suddenly changed to ISTJ the next time I saw him post on here and I thought "what the? that's drastic." Glad to see he's back at INFJ
@Turi
I just want you to know that it's very normal for INFJs to never feel 100% confident in being an INFJ - a big part of it is due to our lack of conscious Fi, I'd recommend studying and getting into Socionics and Enneagram, it will take your mind off questioning your Jung type and it will help with more self discovery (something I can tell you like).


----------



## Xcopy (Dec 10, 2016)

Bunniculla said:


> Guys, guys. We agree Turi’s a Ti user but in what position is the key here? Do you really think it’s dom or aux Ti vs tert Ti? If so, please explain why or why not.
> 
> I think tert Ti fits. There seems to always be an agenda, not necessarily hidden. Doesn’t seem to just be for the sake of making sense of things. Seems to be coming from a hunch or belief and trying to prove (or disprove it), always saying stuff like “oh but I could be wrong”. Always seeking validation from others and then processing the info after. However, there’s a consistent agenda behind it.


Aux Ti would be a bit silly to consider, because I couldn't see him skipping over it. It would have to be something he could either loop into or rely on to such an extent it would be of a consistent amount of usage. I can retract my formal consideration of him using Ti as a dominate function, problem solving seems to be more or less a toy for him. Also, he doesn't really use it in a manner of how a Ti-dom would which can rub me the wrong way easily. Even the Ti-doms I like, can rub me the wrong way.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

MusiCago said:


> I remember I helped Turi figure out he was an INFJ a while ago, but he suddenly changed to ISTJ the next time I saw him post on here and I thought "what the? that's drastic." Glad to see he's back at INFJ
> 
> @Turi
> I just want you to know that it's very normal for INFJs to never feel 100% confident in being an INFJ - a big part of it is due to our lack of conscious Fi, I'd recommend studying and getting into Socionics and Enneagram, it will take your mind off questioning your Jung type and it will help with more self discovery (something I can tell you like).


I'm only recently getting into Socionics, and have been dabbling in a little Enneagram lately - I'm kinda iffy on Enneagram re: "core type" but I'm feeling like my tritype is 5w4, 1w9, 4w5 - perhaps not necessarily in that order.

That tritype is solid because it covers basically everything - the 'head' kind of Thinker vibe I give off sometimes - the F vibes I give off - and the arrogant prick vibes as well. They're all right there in that 514 tritype.

Re: not feeling confident in INFJ - it's a tough one, I've read a fair bit about Fi in INFJs - the following are great:

https://www.stellarmaze.com/fi-in-infjs/ - entire link.

From here: Socionics Types: IEI-INFp



> IEIs not uncommonly apply their cogitations to topics pertaining to morality, ethics, and relationships. They have a strong understanding of the breadth of their inner emotional responses and dispositions to others. However, they may be inclined to treat their internal ethical sentiments somewhat passively; instead they are often more concerned with the energy and emotional responses of others around them. They are more interested in the dynamism of their emotional surroundings and often are inclined to adapt their behavior or even their persona to fit the situation.


This helps understand how I can 'know what I feel' or 'know where I stand' re: things personally, but still be open to new information etc due to being more interested in what others have to say.
I don't relate to adapting my persona to fit the situation, at least not intentionally - if I do this, I don't realise it.

This is a great video.. it's mostly about Ti, though - it's such an accurate clip though, this guy knows what he's talking about, imo:






Have you read this?
Powerful 6th Function of Introverts + Visual Reading – Leon Tsao

Also, this is great too:






Re: ISTJ - I think I kinda of idolised Si to some degree, but I still think I was along the right track, plan on following up more on that - but rather than try to be an introverted sensing type, I might just ask people who identify as such some questions and flesh out a fresh perspective.





Xcopy said:


> Aux Ti would be a bit silly to consider, because I couldn't see him skipping over it. It would have to be something he could either loop into or rely on to such an extent it would be of a consistent amount of usage. I can retract my formal consideration of him using Ti as a dominate function, problem solving seems to be more or less a toy for him. Also, he doesn't really use it in a manner of how a Ti-dom would which can rub me the wrong way easily. Even the Ti-doms I like, can rub me the wrong way.


Cheers for the response - what do you mean by this, haha:


> problem solving seems to be more or less a toy for him


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

I think everyone has had a chance to make/prove or not prove points. This is teetering into a high school like situation. We are all adults. Let's act like them.


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

@Turi asked me what my response was to the apologies question in my own type thread. He said my answer indicated a Thinking preference.

But my question to Turi is this: what's your own answer to the question you asked me?



Turi said:


> When do you usually apologise to someone, and what do you expect in return?


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

@AZH - you're clearly more knowledgeable than me re: Socionics (and probably all of typology, I literally _found out_ about MBTI and personality theory in like, April this year. 

You mentioned that suggesting I was a type with strong Ne was the lulz - here's what the Socionics descriptor says re: Ne in an IEI:



> IEIs are capable of generating a large number of possibilities and ideas, but are likely to view such an exercise with disinterest as opposed to their more natural process of developing explanatory insights about the dynamics of a situation. They may be inclined to continually revisit and expand upon or better organize their existing areas of intellectual interest or mental concoctions instead of moving on to new ideas.


This is perfectly accurate, and I could probably run through my post history and provide numerous examples of this happening.
I believe it's even occurred in that thread that got shut down - I know all the possibilities re: the 'facts' I provided - how they can be interpreted, what they mean - I see it all from many angles - however, I had (still have) a more singular perspective with regards to the truth of it all in a broader context (one that apparently nobody else can see - the people I was going back and forwards with appeared to be 'stuck') - and then rather than explore - externally - all the various factors that might compromise the credibility of the information I provided, I began to comment on the dynamics of the back and forths itself, rather than keep referring back to - or exploring the possibilities of - the information.

I think the whole Ne Id block "ignoring function" thing played out loud and clear, in that thread alone - yet alone my post history here, or the rest of my life, lol.

So considering what Ne in _this position_ actually means - I'm curious as to what you meant - here's a snippet of Ne in an INFJ, from here:
https://www.psychologyjunkie.com/2016/08/19/infj-darkness-understanding-infjs-shadow-functions/



> The INFJ uses Extraverted Intuition (Ne) in a largely unconscious way. They respect it and are intrigued by it, but consciously have a hard time controlling it. If someone challenges one of their Ni insights or their core revelations, the Opposing Role may come into play and the INFJ may use Extraverted Intuition in a confused, haphazard way to try to confirm their Ni beliefs. While INFJs can enjoy brainstorming and thinking about numerous possibilities, much like Ne users can, they can become overwhelmed if these Ne possibilities cause them to doubt their Ni visions or take them out of their preferred focus. This can lead them to lash out and become angry and belligerent with whoever or whatever is causing this stress and confusion.
> 
> Because INFJs respect Extraverted Intuition, they can become quickly angered and frustrated by people who refuse to see things from multiple angles or are unwilling to modify their beliefs when shown a new possibility. However, INFJs can also be stubborn and unwilling to change their views, so their use of the Opposing Role in arguments can seem hypocritical or out of synch to onlookers.


IMO - that is basically what played out, in the other thread - and I've got the self-awareness and perspective to realise this - more than this, I realise it in real-time. I don't just sit here and dwindle over things that have occurred - I'm aware, as I do things, what they mean, how they'll be interpreted, various ways they could be interpreted - I'm aware of when I cherry-pick information (some of the time) to support my own "insights" - I'm completely aware, that when I provide links to statistics from 2014 that are only semi-relevant to the point I was trying to make, that they will be questioned.
I'm aware of each and every aspect of what I'm doing and the possible repercussions etc.

At the same time, my intuition is telling me two things - 1) I'm right, even if the facts aren't completely relevant to the point, they're along the right lines and they should get people to open their eyes and "zoom out" to see what I see.. and 2) I'm being met with narrow-mindedness (this might even be a subjective opinion, I don't know).. so when I'm faced with people who refuse to see alternate perspectives, refuse to consider my insights, then I get pissed off and come across as more 'Se' like i.e 'in your face'.


Eh.

Don't take this post the wrong way - I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean, when you said what you said, considering what Ne in that position means, in an INFJ.

If you have some completely alternate perspective of how Ne manifests in an INFJ - I'd love to know what your sources are, because everything I can find is along the same lines, and I've got more than just the above.
Everything seems to point towards Ne being something an INFJ type likes and admires - yet doesn't really use effectively - and then, hypocritically, thinks that other people who don't use Ne very well are dipshits.

Which sounds like me.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Soul Kitchen said:


> @Turi asked me what my response was to the apologies question in my own type thread. He said my answer indicated a Thinking preference.
> 
> But my question to Turi is this: what's your own answer to the question you asked me?


To me, "sorry" means a lot.

Because of this - I can tend to *not* say sorry, when others might think it's appropriate - because I just feel like "sorry" should come from the heart, and if I ain't feeling it, you ain't getting it.

Say, bumping into people at the shops.. this will sound fucked up - I generally say sorry when _they_ bumped into me.
When I bump into them - I may/may not say sorry - it depends on whether I truly feel remorseful.

I realise how arrogant this sounds - some guy walking into someone at the shops and not saying sorry - but I'll say something like "oh, you alright?" etc - I will *actively avoid* saying "sorry" if I don't think it's warranted.

To me, "sorry" is very meaningful. I will only ever say it, when I mean it, in the most genuine way possible.

I can't even fake saying "sorry" - any time I've tried (and I have tried) - I get called out for not meaning it - my hearts not in it.

This has actually been a point of contention between myself and my wife occasionally, as I might make a mistake with something, and she'll want an apology - but to me, the situation doesn't warrant one - it's too trivial - who cares if I didn't get the Coke I was supposed to get from the shops?
I say, I'll just get it next time I'm there.. or, I'll run back up.. I won't say "oh, sorry" if I don't actually feel it.

So to me, it really depends on the situation - I only ever say it if I truly feel "sorry".

Re: other people saying sorry to me - I don't feel this way, I never want people to literally vocalise that they're sorry - I think this is awkward for me, awkward for them, it may/may not be genuine - I'll see straight through it if it's not so I'd rather avoid that whole situation altogether - and I know when people are remorseful anyway, they don't need to tell me, and there's a weird part of me that doesn't want them to tell me - probably due to the fear of it not being genuine, and me seeing through it - perhaps there's something here I don't want to see, a reality I'd prefer to deny, maybe.


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

Turi said:


> To me, "sorry" means a lot.
> 
> Because of this - I can tend to *not* say sorry, when others might think it's appropriate - because I just feel like "sorry" should come from the heart, and if I ain't feeling it, you ain't getting it.
> 
> ...


Now I'm convinced that you're an INF type as well as an IN type. All that's left is to decide on P or J. Which do you identify with more, and how does it influence your other dichotomies? If you're uncertain, maybe you could list pros and cons for both?


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Turi said:


> I'm feeling like my tritype is 5w4, 1w9, 4w5 - perhaps not necessarily in that order.


My tritype is 5w4, 4w5, 1w9 as well - although I'm not certain how I feel about the tritype theory in general, it seems legit.



> Have you read this?
> Powerful 6th Function of Introverts + Visual Reading – Leon Tsao


I find the 6th function thing very interesting. For me, my first function is Ni and 6th is Ti. For hornpipe2, his first function is Ti and 6th is Ni. I've recently come up with the idea that the 6th function is something one seeks out in others. I'm not certain why or if it's something that could be measured, but I'm beginning to see patterns in people for what they are looking for in a life partner. 

(This could be total BS, too, as it's entirely made up in my mind based on what I've read and what I've observed)


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> To me, "sorry" means a lot.
> 
> Say, bumping into people at the shops.. this will sound fucked up - I generally say sorry when _they_ bumped into me.


Interesting. Why do you apologize when others bump into you? This will probably provide much insight into whether you prefer Fe or Fi.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

AZH said:


> Ok, let's talk about Socionics in the MBTI section lol.
> 
> A Se push... from a Ni-ego? All sensers have strong Se. No intuitive does. This guy shows frequent and competent use of force with no appreciation of it from others. Plus suggesting a type with strong Ne is a real stretch. The guy has less perspective than the Ne PoLRs in this thread. *I've never met a single intuitive who was dogmatic and I doubt I ever will - perspective gets in the way of dogmatism.*
> 
> ...


Oh well, I only used Socionics because Te PoLR was just so obvious, I had to point it out. 

I don't really see much Ne from him either, but the only interaction I've had from him is what I've seen from this thread and the other one, so I really don't have much info to tell. I just thought N more likely than S because of how he comes across. IDK, ISFJs are, for a lack of a better word, "sweeter" than INFJs. INFJs have a more serious vibe to them (from my observation). He didn't seem like an ISFJ, but I won't rule out that possibility either. 

Also, would you consider all S types to be dogmatic as well? Several people have told me that I don't come off as a sensor. I'm a 100% sure of being an Fe dom...

And fwiw I don't think @Aluminum Frost is mistyped at all. I wish the two would just quit arguing.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> PoLR Fe (from here: Socionics Types: ILI-INTp)
> 
> You relate?


Yes. Absolutely.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Reila said:


> Yes. Absolutely.


..what about the rest of the page?
Socionics Types: ILI-INTp


----------



## Xcopy (Dec 10, 2016)

Turi said:


> what do you mean by this, haha:


 Not nearly as nitpicky as a Ti-dom, your process seems more or less to focus on specifically using it during your spare time. Too much Fe usage for Ti-Dom. I said before that tert functions were used like toys to the user, mostly because of it being considered a relief function. I can admit, a Ti-dom and a Ti-tert are significantly different. You're not nearly as stubborn or dismissive of additional input as a Ti-dom would be.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> ..what about the rest of the page?
> Socionics Types: ILI-INTp


I am re-reading it, but the answer is yes — Not everything, obviously, but text in general is quite fitting. ILI was actually my first test result back when made my first "type me" thread. Still, it is socionics, so I dunno.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

After our last discussions about statistics I do believe you may have Te PoLR. 
It's a bit ironic that you view this as the others being stuck when it's how you are viewed by us (at least me). To me, getting to the truth with the right method is the best possible approach, because it is independent of what I think, and therefore it will rarely/never get me actually stuck. If that's not possible then I will just rely on exploring all possibilities and decide on what's more likely and why, I don't need to decide something for certain because there is no certainty, de facto. Perhaps it's my scientific background. 

It's fine to theorize and discuss stuff on some forum and even have wrong methods, at worst you are just another person wrong on the internet, so no biggie. 

You should be more honest about how you come off to people tho, why does it surprise you that people call you confrontational when you say things like "everyone who disagrees with me is dopey"? and multiple other similar posts of that kind


----------



## Rydori (Aug 7, 2017)

Anyone who did that socionic test that @Turi linked

Did anyone find the photo choosing part kind of weird? 
It had me choose this black and white photo of this blond girl and a middle aged woman in a party that got the red eye error from the camera.
Also had me choose between this asian guy eating a sandwich and this bald smiling guy

Also for bonus got ESE,The photo choosing just seems weird.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Snowdori said:


> Anyone who did that socionic test that @Turi linked
> 
> Did anyone find the photo choosing part kind of weird?
> It had me choose this black and white photo of this blond girl and a middle aged woman in a party that got the red eye error from the camera.
> ...


Yes, the photo choosing part was bizarre. A little less bizarre if you consider you are supposed to pick one based not only on the person, but the surroundings, but still, I was curious to how that affects the result of the test.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Xcopy said:


> Not nearly as nitpicky as a Ti-dom, your process seems more or less to focus on specifically using it during your spare time. Too much Fe usage for Ti-Dom. I said before that tert functions were used like toys to the user, mostly because of it being considered a relief function. I can admit, a Ti-dom and a Ti-tert are significantly different. You're not nearly as stubborn or dismissive of additional input as a Ti-dom would be.


Ah, fair enough - yeah, it's probably not an entirely positive trait, as I'm finding it out - it might be a good idea to be more critical of the sources I choose to receive information from.

Due to the way introverted intuition works - basically, if I don't be careful with that kind of thing - misinformation could creep into my worldview/perspective and become 'truths'. Which isn't something I want. I'm aware of it now, though.




Reila said:


> I am re-reading it, but the answer is yes — Not everything, obviously, but text in general is quite fitting. ILI was actually my first test result back when made my first "type me" thread. Still, it is socionics, so I dunno.


Cool, what's wrong with Socionics?
I did some reading up on the Ego, Id, Super Ego and Super Id in general (removed from type-specific information) and it makes a whole lot of sense to me, I'm digging it.



Red Panda said:


> After our last discussions about statistics I do believe you may have Te PoLR.
> It's a bit ironic that you view this as the others being stuck when it's how you are viewed by us (at least me). To me, getting to the truth with the right method is the best possible approach, because it is independent of what I think, and therefore it will rarely/never get me actually stuck. If that's not possible then I will just rely on exploring all possibilities and decide on what's more likely and why, I don't need to decide something for certain because there is no certainty, de facto. Perhaps it's my scientific background.


Ah.. well, there's a clash here - because I don't seek out the 'right methods' to get to the truth - rather, I just know it already, and I work backwards from that in order to express myself to others.
I don't build up to a truth, if that makes sense.. I break it down.

So this is where the clash is re: the other thread - other people want to build up to something, and I feel like I'm already a billion miles above wherever they want to build up to, frustrated at why they're still stuck down there. 
Then of course, this irks me a little as I feel like I'm up against a brick wall, critical of those who don't see what I see - without taking into consideration that I haven't (and now, can't be bothered to) broken down, or expressed my thoughts in a clear and concise manner that other people can understand.
Interesting.

For whatever reason, I saw this whole scenario play out as if I was a bird, with a clear view of everything that's going on, both on the ground below, and the truth which is right here with me in the sky - and when I look down, I see lemmings walking off a cliff even though there's a stairway to where I am, right there for them.

I'm not interested in, nor see value in, truths etc 'independent' of what I think.



> You should be more honest about how you come off to people tho, why does it surprise you that people call you confrontational when you say things like "everyone who disagrees with me is dopey"? and multiple other similar posts of that kind


I'm completely honest - it does surprise me. 
I'll explain why - when I say things like "everyone who disagrees with me is a dope" - I'm not actually aiming to hurt anyones feelings, I'm not intentionally being aggressive, I'm not going on the offense or trying to take a shot at anybody - I feel like I'm stating a fact.

There's no emotion behind those statements. I just see it like, I've expressed my perspective - I've gone out of my comfort zone and actually sought out external evidence/facts/data etc to support it - and I'm still being met with small-mindedness - so, out comes the "fact" - it's not really an insult, it's more like resignation, but, I digress, I can see how other people would take it the wrong way.

Yes, I'm aware of all counter-arguments to the above paragraph including "what do you mean the wrong way? you said xxxx, how can you expect anyone to take it any other way?" and the something along the lines of the classic "Sorry for responding to what you _said_, not what you _meant_".. lol

Thanks for the response btw - I don't want this.. 'argument/debate' to go any further with you, I like your posts and generally agree with what you've got to say, really not interested in butting heads.



Snowdori said:


> Anyone who did that socionic test that @Turi linked
> 
> Did anyone find the photo choosing part kind of weird?
> It had me choose this black and white photo of this blond girl and a middle aged woman in a party that got the red eye error from the camera.
> ...


Yeah, I thought the picture section was weird and awkward - I don't get the point - I understand it might be in relation to some correlations the test designers are trying to make? As in, it's not related to your results?
I don't know. I don't like it either. Seems.. useless.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> Cool, what's wrong with Socionics?
> I did some reading up on the Ego, Id, Super Ego and Super Id in general (removed from type-specific information) and it makes a whole lot of sense to me, I'm digging it.


I don't put a lot of faith in it. Haven't seen enough evidence to consider it an useful method. I am not saying it is wrong or anything, just sharing my personal relationship with the method. Anyways, am I wrong in assuming relating to ILI supports what I told in a PM, about my type? I think it does.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Reila said:


> I don't put a lot of faith in it. Haven't seen enough evidence to consider it an useful method. I am not saying it is wrong or anything, just sharing my personal relationship with the method. Anyways, am I wrong in assuming relating to ILI supports what I told in a PM, about my type? I think it does.


No, I think it does too.

I'm with you re: not much evidence for Socionics, I mean I only know of like.. 2 websites.. but, I like what I read, it makes sense to me.

I'd like to get more into it.


----------

