# Wrong type, mistype.



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

I want to address the idea that some people are not the type they think they are. Also why some people might be annoyed by this.

So it is not some ill will. really. Sometimes it is, I do not like this person therefor he or she can not be the same type as me or this person that I like.

Mostly it is not. People of different type behave different at a very fundamental scale. if you do science it is like you get result all over the place and can not draw any conclusions if people are mistyped. It is annoying. Sure we can just all hang out community, this typing business get in the way of everyone just be the same and have some laughs. Just play the stereotype and make fun of each other in ways they do not really take it personally because it is 'the type'. But no. For some people it is not enough, they are not here really for the community more then that is the bonus of it but to learn about each other and the personalities and types and things like that. I know that it exist people spending loads of time with someone they think was their dual and they really wanted to get down to the bottom of this theory and then it turned out this person just typed their dual because they wanted the attention. Also some people are mistyped because for example INFJ in MBTI is this miss understand creature with psychedelic powers. Se is the type that want to have fun and go out do a lot of stuff and can not sit still. ILI is the misunderstand genius. List goes on. 

Get your shit together people.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Okay... so some people are mistyped, according to you. I'm sure everyone knows that mistypes exist. However, those mistypes will be different for different people, because there are several different understandings of Socionics here. 

Either way it doesn't impact anyone's life outside this forum. So what's the big deal?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Night Huntress said:


> Okay... so some people are mistyped, according to you. I'm sure everyone knows that mistypes exist. However, those mistypes will be different for different people, because there are several different understandings of Socionics here.
> 
> Either way it doesn't impact anyone's life outside this forum. So what's the big deal?


I was reacting to Selena. But yes, people are of wrong type sometimes. No, which Socionics you find most accurate does not matter. The type is static tho all Socionics. Well, if you have to spend many more hours on Socionics because some mofo is leading you away from it because they want to steal your time that become a problem.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> I was reacting to Selena. But yes, people are of wrong type sometimes. No, which Socionics you find most accurate does not matter. The type is static tho all Socionics. Well, if you have to spend many more hours on Socionics because some mofo is leading you away from it because they want to steal your time that become a problem.


Of course there's only one technically "correct" understanding of Socionics - the way the creators intended to present it. That's the basic way of looking at it. However, clearly the REALITY is that different Socionists and casual typers do not share the same understanding. Each of them think their own way of understanding the system is correct and the others aren't. So the fact is, no matter how static Socionics was intended to be, it isn't. People have different understandings of the theory. That's why you're having this clash in the first place. Because you believe you're right, and others believe you're not.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Night Huntress said:


> Of course there's only one technically "correct" understanding of Socionics - the way the creators intended to present it. That's the basic way of looking at it. However, clearly the REALITY is that different Socionists and casual typers do not share the same understanding. Each of them think their own way of understanding the system is correct and the others aren't. So the fact is, no matter how static Socionics was intended to be, it isn't. People have different understandings of the theory. That's why you're having this clash in the first place. Because you believe you're right, and others believe you're not.


hm, I believe in this. jung dude find these 8 types (functions) based on years, 30 or so, of dealing with patients. Then this Socionics girl pick this up and put it into a thinking framework. she was ILE. Now this become a science field. Then people continue to explore this. The base is solid. That said. Do you see my dilemma? Socionics is basically founded on the idea of duality, and when people try to explore that they end up getting stuck for hundreds of hours with some lonely cat lady SEI that want to steal their attention. (extreme example)


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> hm, I believe in this. jung dude find these 8 types (functions) based on years, 30 or so, of dealing with patients. Then this Socionics girl pick this up and put it into a thinking framework. she was ILE. Now this become a science field. Then people continue to explore this. The base is solid. That said. Do you see my dilemma? Socionics is basically founded on the idea of duality, and when people try to explore that they end up getting stuck for hundreds of hours with some lonely cat lady SEI that want to steal their attention. (extreme example)


I don't quite see the dilemma, actually. Are you saying duality is what fucks Socionics up?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Night Huntress said:


> I don't quite see the dilemma, actually. Are you saying duality is what fucks Socionics up?


No but mistypes. Especially when the type is used to make shitty behavior valid. and especially when someone is lying about type to play on peoples wish to understand their dual.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> No but mistypes. Especially when the type is used to make shitty behavior valid. and especially when someone is lying about type to play on peoples wish to understand their dual.


But mistypes are bound to happen, because people understand the system differently. It's inevitable. All our brains process things differently and emphasize different aspects of systems.

I really doubt there are many people who would outright lie about their type to impress someone. People aren't that malicious, and after all, it's just typology. Not everyone takes this very seriously.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Night Huntress said:


> But mistypes are bound to happen, because people understand the system differently. It's inevitable. All our brains process things differently and emphasize different aspects of systems.
> 
> I really doubt there are many people who would outright lie about their type to impress someone. People aren't that malicious, and after all, it's just typology. Not everyone takes this very seriously.


you are in the socionics area, which is basically a russian science. That is deep into typology, you would expect people here to take it seriously.


----------



## selena87 (Aug 15, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> I was reacting to Selena.


Wait, you are reacting to me here? As far as I know, I asked you for your opinion in my thread on why you think I might be on the Si/Ne axis, or if not, simply give some feedback on my type. I'm really interested in your reasoning, and I will take it into account if it makes sense, but sure you don't have to answer it if you don't have the time.

But what does this thread have to do with my question? 



> I want to address the idea that some people are not the type they think they are. Also why some people might be annoyed by this.


Are you replying to me with this? If you think that I'm not the type I think I am, then could you please explain why directly in my thread?



> I know that it exist people spending loads of time with someone they think was their dual and they really wanted to get down to the bottom of this theory and then it turned out this person just typed their dual because they wanted the attention.


What are you implying? Please spell it out for me.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

selena87 said:


> What are you implying? Please spell it out for me.


Please. It is spelled out pretty clearly. Read it at face value and nothing else.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> you are in the socionics area, which is basically a russian science. That is deep into typology, you would expect people here to take it seriously.


Serious enough to become outright liars...? That's a very serious accusation to make about the people on this forum. If you have a specific dislike for someone's methods, just go speak to them directly and tell them what you disagree with.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Night Huntress said:


> Serious enough to become outright liars...? That's a very serious accusation to make about the people on this forum. If you have a specific dislike for someone's methods, just go speak to them directly and tell them what you disagree with.


It is serious. And as been covered earlier all types of people are somewhat bias. I think that is the main reason why this is not a science tbh.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

What is the purpose of this thread, exactly, anyway? To call out people who you think are mistypes? That's against the forum rules.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Entropic said:


> What is the purpose of this thread, exactly, anyway? To call out people who you think are mistypes? That's against the forum rules.


I think it is ok, it is general enough topic. And something that been bugging this forum for months if not since it started. *I do think many people left MBTI and went to this forum for the very thing that people would be more into this and be more often correct typed. *


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> I think it is ok, it is general enough topic. And something that been bugging this forum for months if not since it started. *I do think many people left MBTI and went to this forum for the very thing that people would be more into this and be more often correct typed. *


And what evidence do you have that people are mistyped and that such a glaring amount of them would be to the point it warrants a topic to "call them out"?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Entropic said:


> And what evidence do you have that people are mistyped and that such a glaring amount of them would be to the point it warrants a topic to "call them out"?


One good point would be, if we look at older threads you can see people claiming to be one type and saying things from that POV but not turned out to be an other type. unless all of a sudden things change and everyone is correctly typed today that principle would still hold true.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> One good point would be, if we look at older threads you can see people claiming to be one type and saying things from that POV but not turned out to be an other type. unless all of a sudden things change and everyone is correctly typed today that principle would still hold true.


Only if their understanding of themselves and the subject remains static, which it does not. People can improve and change and so can their understanding and with that people can end up retyping themselves. I changed type several times during my time on PerC; not because I ended up mistyping but because as I went on and learning about the systems and myself, my awareness improved and it was easier to find an accurate typing over time. 

You won't find this ideal version of reality where everyone is correctly typed; it just won't happen. Idk why you are so hung up on that only good socionics must come from this ideal in the first place. It is sure worth striving for, but it's definitely not something which can be done in practice.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Only if their understanding of themselves and the subject remains static, which it does not. People can improve and change and so can their understanding and with that people can end up retyping themselves. I changed type several times during my time on PerC; not because I ended up mistyping but because as I went on and learning about the systems and myself, my awareness improved and it was easier to find an accurate typing over time.
> 
> You won't find this ideal version of reality where everyone is correctly typed; it just won't happen. Idk why you are so hung up on that only good socionics must come from this ideal in the first place. It is sure worth striving for, but it's definitely not something which can be done in practice.


Well, good for you. Your personal journey through life. But in a typing standpoint, you do not change type. And other people do not change type. And if you go around telling people that how you deal with information is the EII way you leading people off. *and that is bad. *


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> Well, good for you. Your personal journey through life. But in a typing standpoint, you do not change type. And other people do not change type. And if you go around telling people that how you deal with information is the EII way you leading people off. *and that is bad. *


No, people do not change type in their life, but their labels certainly change and what you seem to reject to is the idea that people mislabel themselves which is bound to happen because of the reasons I cited in the above. People mistype because their label indicates the wrong kind of information about who they are, and that label changes as their understanding of the system and themselves change.


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

I'm really sorry, but as much as I read this, it makes no sense. You've just made this to rage about some mistypes, which are quite common. But you just can't keep your train of thought, so your argument is just "no, no, no". You're just denying, saying no and providing little to nothing to favor you. You're just angry, and venting in public is not a really good idea. You're making a mess of yourself. 

Chill out. There's no "true" way to type someone, for which we have different methods. For example, we have the video interview (I think it dropped out? That's so sad, it seemed to be a good one), or the 80 questions (some of which are redundant, sorry). Or just watching them interact, or compare their behaviour to your undertanding of the IEs... We can't be 100 % sure of someone's type. The only way I can think of that's somewhat reliable is to see their quadra interaction.

So calm down. It happens sometimes, but don't take it too seriously. If someone's mistyped, well, at some point they will notice. This thread is pointless. What do you propose to solve this? That we start a crusade to question everyone to correctly type them? Or will this eventually lead to a conclusion? Don't think so; this'll be just another fight we can actually avoid.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Graveyard said:


> I'm really sorry, but as much as I read this, it makes no sense. You've just made this to rage about some mistypes, which are quite common. But you just can't keep your train of thought, so your argument is just "no, no, no". You're just denying, saying no and providing little to nothing to favor you. You're just angry, and venting in public is not a really good idea. You're making a mess of yourself.
> 
> Chill out. There's no "true" way to type someone, for which we have different methods. For example, we have the video interview (I think it dropped out? That's so sad, it seemed to be a good one), or the 80 questions (some of which are redundant, sorry). Or just watching them interact, or compare their behaviour to your undertanding of the IEs... We can't be 100 % sure of someone's type. The only way I can think of that's somewhat reliable is to see their quadra interaction.
> 
> So calm down. It happens sometimes, but don't take it too seriously. If someone's mistyped, well, at some point they will notice. This thread is pointless. What do you propose to solve this? That we start a crusade to question everyone to correctly type them? Or will this eventually lead to a conclusion? Don't think so; this'll be just another fight we can actually avoid.


You sound like such a caregiver. I do not think it is a broken train of thought. I find it quite relevant. I might have to go back to this thread in the future and review it. But when I do I usually find that I still agree with it,


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

Captain Mclain said:


> You sound like such a caregiver. I do not think it is a broken train of thought. I find it quite relevant. I might have to go back to this thread in the future and review it. But when I do I usually find that I still agree with it,


Eh, I'm not saying it's a broken train of thought. I'm saying this thread is pointless. You're just complaining, and instead of trying to solve it, you just keep complaining. I'm asking if this will lead to anything in your opinion, because really, this just sounds like whining. No offense intended. 

Regarding being a caregiver... ehhh, not really. I just don't like fights that lead to nothing but discomfort. But please let's not lose focus and turn this into something it wasn't meant to be. ;P


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Graveyard said:


> Eh, I'm not saying it's a broken train of thought. I'm saying this thread is pointless. You're just complaining, and instead of trying to solve it, you just keep complaining. I'm asking if this will lead to anything in your opinion, because really, this just sounds like whining. No offense intended.
> 
> Regarding being a caregiver... ehhh, not really. I just don't like fights that lead to nothing but discomfort. But please let's not lose focus and turn this into something it wasn't meant to be. ;P


In a way, all threads here are pointless. I think it address something very relevant.


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

Captain Mclain said:


> In a way, all threads here are pointless. I think it address something very relevant.


Well, yes, that's true. But even within our standards, this doesn't lead anywhere. 

And indeed it's relevant. But since we cannot question someone's type unless they state otherwise, this... doesn't click.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> I want to address the idea that some people are not the type they think they are. Also why some people might be annoyed by this.
> 
> So it is not some ill will. really. Sometimes it is, I do not like this person therefor he or she can not be the same type as me or this person that I like.
> 
> ...


I'm not mistyped, you're just not an expert like the others.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> I want to address the idea that some people are not the type they think they are. Also why some people might be annoyed by this.
> 
> So it is not some ill will. really. Sometimes it is, I do not like this person therefor he or she can not be the same type as me or this person that I like.
> 
> ...


A lot of assumptions here. Not everyone goes by feelings before logic when typing themselves  But yeah I've heard some Fi egos admit before that they can fall into the mistake of typing people based on feelings of like/dislike instead of determining objective aspects of ITR.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> I'm not mistyped, you're just not an expert like the others.


I seen you around. I have no reason to believe you are anything else then what you say you are. (LII not actually yoda).


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

myst91 said:


> A lot of assumptions here. Not everyone goes by feelings before logic when typing themselves  But yeah I've heard some Fi egos admit before that they can fall into the mistake of typing people based on feelings of like/dislike instead of determining objective aspects of ITR.


You can not really type with either without bringing in some perception and even then it is hard. Still, the Creators of Socionics and people who tribute to the theory are all typed. Most likely correct. During their meetings about Socionics back in the days the creator could say stuff like "do not talk from your Super-Ego" suggesting it was visible.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

myst91 said:


> A lot of assumptions here. Not everyone goes by feelings before logic when typing themselves  But yeah I've heard some *Fi egos admit before that they can fall into the mistake of typing people based on feelings of like/dislike* instead of determining objective aspects of ITR.


Shit, if I feel like that, I do that thing where _I don't type people_. To any fellow Fi egos who do the bolded, follow my example, simply for the sake of make much better the Socionic.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Captain Mclain said:


> You can not really type with either without bringing in some perception and even then it is hard. Still, the Creators of Socionics and people who tribute to the theory are all typed. Most likely correct. During their meetings about Socionics back in the days the creator could say stuff like "do not talk from your Super-Ego" suggesting it was visible.


I don't see how your point would go against mine. 

Must've been fun, those meetings.


----------



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

If any of the people you think are mistyped has an open typing thread, you could try posting there instead of creating a passive aggressive topic about it.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

myst91 said:


> I don't see how your point would go against mine.
> 
> *Must've been fun, those meetings.*


Ye


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Distortions said:


> If any of the people you think are mistyped has an open typing thread, you could try posting there instead of creating a passive aggressive topic about it.


I guess I have to respond to this. We are so lucky to have such a mature person on the forum as yourself. Since I have not seen you around I will just assume you have no idea what kind of bs that been going around in Socionics forum lately. But good for you, thank you for telling me the truth.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> I guess I have to respond to this. We are so lucky to have such a mature person on the forum as yourself. Since I have not seen you around I will just assume you have no idea what kind of bs that been going around in Socionics forum lately. But good for you, thank you for telling me the truth.


I have to ask...

What is it that REALLY bothers you? This amount of anger can't be seriously caused by someone's opinion. There is something causing all of this or may you call me Ishmael.


----------



## Serpent (Aug 6, 2015)

Captain Mclain said:


> I guess I have to respond to this. We are so lucky to have such a mature person on the forum as yourself. Since I have not seen you around I will just assume you have no idea what kind of bs that been going around in Socionics forum lately. But good for you, thank you for telling me the truth.


Way to be a dick. I don't understand why you're so butthurt about mistyped people.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Serpent said:


> Way to be a dick. I don't understand why you're so butthurt about mistyped people.


I do not really have anything to add at this point. I think I got to say what I wanted, please address the issue if you like or do not.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

Night Huntress said:


> Okay... so some people are mistyped, according to you. I'm sure everyone knows that mistypes exist. However, those mistypes will be different for different people, because there are several different understandings of Socionics here.
> 
> Either way it doesn't impact anyone's life outside this forum. So what's the big deal?


I would expect nothing less from Sir Intregra. You are so wise.  I love Helsing BTW


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

Night Huntress said:


> Of course there's only one technically "correct" understanding of Socionics - the way the creators intended to present it. That's the basic way of looking at it. However, clearly the REALITY is that different Socionists and casual typers do not share the same understanding. Each of them think their own way of understanding the system is correct and the others aren't. So the fact is, no matter how static Socionics was intended to be, it isn't. People have different understandings of the theory. That's why you're having this clash in the first place. Because you believe you're right, and others believe you're not.


This is very spot on. @Captain 
You can not say you are right even if you are right. We can not all follow this way of typing. If you notice we could have a character and the type be very clear based on the theory but people will all have totally different types from A to Z. Why in fact I wrote a post about this very topic saying it makes no sense to leave it up to opinion since everyone has a different Opinion and everyone thinks they are right about that opinion. So if they all guess one of the MBTI types, which ones are right? Also what are they judging it on? Is it the fact they dislike that person? or that they really think so. Some people seem to be rather judgmental about this crap, and want to say "Since you not like me you must be this type and you cant be this type since its a reward we must bestow to you" which in reality your type does not WORK THAT WAY AT ALL.

Let me put this another way. Its like saying you are black but you don't fit the stereotype of being black. So everyone says "You not really black, you are white". However that black person knows they are black, but they have to justify being black, just to be accepted as a black person. How is that really fair to anyone?


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

LittleDicky said:


> I would expect nothing less from Sir Intregra. You are so wise.  I love Helsing BTW


Ahah, I haven't even started watching yet (will remedy that soon), but she is my new favorite character ^_^

Thank you!


----------

