# Socionics type?



## Diphenhydramine (Apr 9, 2010)

SEE or SLE.

Post yours.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

Typically deemed ILI.

Looking forward to seeing this forum build up so I can figure out how correct that is.


----------



## QrivaN (Aug 3, 2012)

I'm pretty sure I'm ILI or LII.


----------



## Annietopia (Aug 16, 2011)

IEE 
​10 char


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Diphenhydramine said:


> SEE or SLE.
> 
> Post yours.


Eh this is some new subforum?

Ti-SLE. 

I considered LSI (and Ti-dom in MBTI) for a while but I doubt that one, I'm nowhere as rigid as that type is depicted as (plus I'm pretty sure I'm extraverted in MBTI though that isn't a determining factor for socionics), though I believe these LSI descriptions are overemphasizing that anyway. But my Ti is definitely more flexible. And the Fe-DS is not so much me either, more Fe-HA.

I considered SEE too because I kind of related to some gamma values and certain parts in Se descriptions of SEE really resonate to me but eventually decided against it as the Fi parts of those Se descriptions were so not much me. I assumed the rest that resonated with me could go with SLE's Se too? My Fi is not always terrible as I like building relationships with certain select people and I don't screw up so extremely bad in them, because I do pay attention to these people, but it's still definitely more PoLR than Creative function for me... I do screw up with Fi at times inadvertently even in these relationships. I also see the Te as unvalued demonstrative more than valued mobilizing function.

I'm curious why you are undecided on SLE vs SEE?


----------



## sorry_neither (Mar 21, 2012)

Socionics forum? Nice. Just as I was getting more interested in this.

I'm ILI, though I have no idea how to determine subtype beyond reading some unhelpful descriptions.


----------



## voicetrocity (Mar 31, 2012)

IEE.

I, admittedly, haven't done much in the way of research in Socionics though.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

I'm ILI. Definitely excited about this forum - more resources on the way!


----------



## Lady Lullaby (Jun 7, 2010)

I am IEI :kitteh:

I really, really (*heard in Shrek's voice) like this subforum's topic!


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

ILE/ENTp I'm ecstatic about this forum, hopefully this clears up a load of misunderstandings now.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Either IEE or EII. Ne subtype for both.

From extensive research in the subject its clear *I'm IEE - 3Ne subtype*...aka Huxley or Psychologist.


----------



## donkeybals (Jan 13, 2011)

ILE - Intuitive Logical Extrovert - ENTp

Hmm, I like the terminology better in this Jungian branch, intuitive logical extrovert, is much more strait forward than extrovert intuitive thinking perceiving. You don't have to have a long wind explanation while explaining it to someone unfamiliar to Jungian Philosophy, much more layman.


----------



## ImminentThunder (May 15, 2011)

Either IEI or EII. Not certain yet. Hopefully after lurking around this forum a bit more I'll be able to figure it out, as well as gain a better understanding of the theory.


----------



## pmj85 (Jul 31, 2010)

*scratches head*

I went through this properly (I actually refined it a few times to ensure no conflicts occurred). I cross referenced it with friends, too. They initially said that I was being too hard on myself with some of the choices, but then agreed I am _that_ much of an asshat at times.

Anyway:

Logical-Intuitive Extratim "The Pioneer" - ENTJ

I can't see it being correct to be honest. More research needed.


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

I get IEI. Making that an INFJ? :s


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Either IEE or IEI, apparently. At least according to Socionics. I think I might suit IEI more, to be honest. ^_^ Anyways, this is great! I was actually just getting into Socionics as of late. It's very intriguing and still mostly a mystery to me how the entire system works. However, sometimes I am inclined to think it has more strong points than MBTI.


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

A couple days ago I noticed this subforum and thought it had been here all along and I'd just missed it, lol. I don't know much about Socionics but from this site...

Model A - Wikisocion

...and from reading through all the types on the site, the only type I could be in the Socionics system is IEE, the "self-appointed psychologist" first, the "social connector" second since I drift through all types of clubs and activities. From a minor amount of study in the past, I thought I was Alpha quadra, but from Boolean11's pinned threads Humanitarian fits better, with Aldous Huxley (per Boolean's post) being a good archetype.

What other sites are being used to research Socionics types?


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Radiant Truth said:


> ILE/ENTp I'm ecstatic about this forum, hopefully this clears up a load of misunderstandings now.


I'm afraid the misunderstandings can't ever be truly cleared up. The amount of misunderstandings is in some way linked to the subjectiveness of the topic. The more subjective, the more misunderstanding and confusion. I would like it to be more empirical before trying to claim so much right to knowing how communication between people and relationships work.




pmj85 said:


> *scratches head*
> 
> I went through this properly (I actually refined it a few times to ensure no conflicts occurred). I cross referenced it with friends, too. They initially said that I was being too hard on myself with some of the choices, but then agreed I am _that_ much of an asshat at times.
> 
> ...


Your approach will not work, some conflicts will always be left in there. If you feel you are really LIE in the system, that's about as far as you can get. If you have doubts about it, why is that?




firedell said:


> I get IEI. Making that an INFJ? :s


No.




Julia Bell said:


> Either IEE or IEI, apparently. At least according to Socionics. I think I might suit IEI more, to be honest. ^_^ Anyways, this is great! I was actually just getting into Socionics as of late. It's very intriguing and still mostly a mystery to me how the entire system works. However, sometimes I am inclined to think it has more strong points than MBTI.


Why do you think it has more strong points than MBTI? I'm curious.




Karen said:


> ...and from reading through all the types on the site, the only type I could be in the Socionics system is IEE, the "self-appointed psychologist" first, the "social connector" second since I drift through all types of clubs and activities. From a minor amount of study in the past, I thought I was Alpha quadra, but from Boolean11's pinned threads Humanitarian fits better, with Aldous Huxley (per Boolean's post) being a good archetype.
> 
> What other sites are being used to research Socionics types?


Yes superficially you do look like IEE.  Non-superficially, who knows. 

Wikisocion is okay, and Rick DeLong's blog and site (socionist.blogspot.com and socionics.us) are cool too and some articles/resources at the16types.info as well. Though the forum there at 16types is not good, people are stuck on silly ways of typism and stuck in the utter bullshit that is called Visual Identification.

However, please note that there is NO official best site about socionics. Not even in Russia.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

If anyone would like to PM me with a suggestion of what mine could be - I would greatly appreciate it (but not in thread - don't want to derail.) ^_^


----------



## Wendixy (Mar 1, 2011)

SEI (ISFp in socionics too) Lol I know they are different, but I still got the same letters.


----------



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

itsme45 said:


> Yeah many of the things you listed are associated with Se-base. A few things also sounded like weak F and none of the things sounded like weak T, but I don't know you, so...


I think that I am literally too stupid and impulsive to be a Thinker? But at the same time, too cynical for a Feeler. Whatever. Haha!


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

reckless summer nights said:


> I think that I am literally too stupid and impulsive to be a Thinker? But at the same time, too cynical for a Feeler. Whatever. Haha!


Whats your thinking and feeling like?
*Option A:*


> The individual is keen on accumulating factual knowledge on subjects of personal interest and those that help him be more efficient and productive, but he's often unsure of his ability to find and select the correct information and is therefore attracted to people whom he sees as competent in that area and reassure him.





> The individual is very adept at perceiving, establishing, and maintaining personal bonds between people. However, these bonds are often perceived as being situational and flexible rather than static. The individual is inclined to focus on establishing personal bonds with other people in the context of realizing or following perceptions from his base function.
> The person easily creates a sense of closeness and kinship between people by expressing like and acceptance, but these sentiments are situational rather than an expression of permanent feelings. If the person's mood or external situation changes, he or she may "turn off" the feelings instantly, even forgetting whom they had created the feeling of kinship with.


*Option B:*


> The individual longs for situations where people are having fun, laughing and joking, and feel emotionally free and spontaneous. However, he is generally unable to produce this atmosphere himself and uses other means to create situations where there is a good chance that others will take the emotional initiative and create a fun and emotionally stimulating atmosphere. Failure at such attempts are met with dismay, which the individual either hides or reacts to with frustration and annoyance.





> The individual easily generates logical systems and formulations to explain a set of phenomena that he has experienced or studied. However, these logical systems or explanations are not viewed as permanent or all-encompassing, but can be improved upon or even discarded as new experience and information is added.


----------



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Whats your thinking and feeling like?


In general, I relate to some aspects from both options. Second description from Option A and Second description from Option B. If I had to choose between two, I would probably take B.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

reckless summer nights said:


> In general, I relate to some aspects from both options. Second description from Option A and Second description from Option B. If I had to choose between two, I would probably take B.


Whats your attitude towards this feeling or thinking? Which rings more for you?


> EthicsWhen amongst those he holds a superficial relationship with, the SEE is very adept at livening up the mood, energizing others, and getting people excited about something. It usually bores him to do so though, and he would not seek out the company of such people who require this kind of involvement on a regular basis.
> There is a tendency for this type not to be phased by intense emotional situations. When others discuss "the horrible tragedy" of things, or lose control of their emotions, crying intensely and feeling sorry for themselves, the SEE realizes that these feelings are just temporary and inconsequential. During these brief periods where a friend is emotionally unstable and unable to take care of themselves, the SEE will tend to the real life aspect of things, keeping their feet on the ground and helping them with basic survival until this period passes.
> 
> 
> After the function descriptions, we can add other interesting sections like "typical life problems of LSI and how to deal with them," "typical sentiments and life philosophy," etc.





> logicSLEs have the ability to pick out information which will help them achieve a goal; they will often refer to well-known facts, statistics and historical examples to back up their claims. Often their own viewpoint will remain standing in the face of a majority opinion, as they know how to formulate a strong argument. SLEs will often question the authenticity or reliability of informational sources, preferring not to use those which are doubtful or which have been proven wrong in the past. They enjoy learning about a wide variety of things, and are motivated by the prospect of rewards and status; they like to prove their authority and skills e.g. through a large amount of academic awards or extra curricular certificates.
> SLEs are very practical, hard-working individuals. They know how to utilize their time effectively in order to reach any given goal, and have no problem discerning efficiency and utility from incompetence and uselessness. Nonetheless, they retain a kind of "don't care" attitude when it comes to productivity and effectiveness. They feel that it is a waste of time to sit around and discuss efficiency, and would rather act effectively. SLEs may playfully mock those who they believe are "obsessed" with productivity, efficiency or effective action.
> 
> 
> SLEs often assume the role of someone who is always ready to assist people in their practical affairs, even to the point of others' annoyance or offense to the SLE's obtrusiveness (which is simply enthusiasm to the SLE). They enjoy receiving thanks for their services, and take full responsibility for their actions. Their intentions towards others in this area are generally always good.


----------



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Whats your attitude towards this feeling or thinking? Which rings more for you?


Then again, I definitely can relate to both descriptions - I can't choose one. It's impossible!


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

reckless summer nights said:


> Then again, I definitely can relate to both descriptions - I can't choose one. It's impossible!


Descriptions are tricky, its either you "subject" or "object" your feeling. I think you are more FiTe than TiFe, both can display similar behaviours when a person becomes more developed.


----------



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Descriptions are tricky, its either you "subject" or "object" your feeling. I think you are more FiTe than TiFe, both can display similar behaviours when a person becomes more developed.


Thank you! 
I can say that I share all functions of ESFP - especially Se and Fi, but whenever it comes to thinking, I choose Ti over Te.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

reckless summer nights said:


> Thank you!
> I can say that I share all functions of ESFP - especially Se and Fi, but whenever it comes to thinking, I choose Ti over Te.


Ti and Fi actually contradict each other, when your Fi works with Te, you probably feel like its "Ti" since you have to think internally to make sense of things. Well that wouldn't be what true Ti is since anybody who can think does that.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Diphenhydramine said:


> SEE or SLE.
> Post yours.


EIE-Ni (ENFj)

same type as 
- Sean Connery
- Jack Nicholson
- Samuel L. Jackson
- Lady Gaga
...oh, and Katherine Heigl :dry:


----------



## AimfortheBrain (Nov 2, 2010)

I'm still just getting into it, but I seem like a total ISTj. What is that LSI?


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

@AimfortheBrain
What drives your "traditionalist" and judgmental attitude? 
Sensing Logical Introtim - Wikisocion
Logical Sensing Introtim - Wikisocion


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

reckless summer nights said:


> In general, I relate to some aspects from both options. Second description from Option A and Second description from Option B. If I had to choose between two, I would probably take B.


What is common between the two options you picked is that both are the positive sides of the descriptions. You didn't opt to take any of the negative ones


----------



## AimfortheBrain (Nov 2, 2010)

Boolean11 said:


> @AimfortheBrain
> What drives your "traditionalist" and judgmental attitude?
> Sensing Logical Introtim - Wikisocion
> Logical Sensing Introtim - Wikisocion


I'm not sure what you mean, but are you asking me which one of those I am?

I read over both links and they both fit in certain ways. SLI might have fit a little more, although there were parts of the LSI description that hit home.


----------



## Spades (Aug 31, 2011)

ILE
a


----------



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

itsme45 said:


> What is common between the two options you picked is that both are the positive sides of the descriptions. You didn't opt to take any of the negative ones


Uh oh! I didn't mean that - I didn't choose those descriptions, because they are positive. And, believe me, I have a lot of negative sides... just not the ones that were mentioned here.


----------



## DomNapoleon (Jan 21, 2012)

I was tested as ENFj>INFp>INFj
I should inform more about it :frustrating:


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

reckless summer nights said:


> Uh oh! I didn't mean that - I didn't choose those descriptions, because they are positive. And, believe me, I have a lot of negative sides... just not the ones that were mentioned here.


Haha okay, anyway it's interesting you related to both strong Fi and Ti but I guess it could be possible


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

I be ILE. I would think Socionics to be redundant if it weren't for the different, sometimes more accurate, approach.


----------



## WindowLicker (Aug 3, 2010)

EIE Your result

Socionics misunderstands me. Me a J? haha


----------



## Lady Lullaby (Jun 7, 2010)

Lady Lullaby said:


> I am IEI :kitteh:
> 
> I really, really (*heard in Shrek's voice) like this subforum's topic!


Tonight I tested as EII - (INFj)​


----------

