# Another try



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

-


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

The Doctor said:


> I see a heck of a lot of Fi in there, but if you don't understand Ne, I doubt you're INFP. You also don't seem like you're actually a feeler, despite the Fi.
> 
> *Someone mentioned that you couldn't be INTP because you seem repulsed by Fe- that's not true. It's inferior, so many INTPs seem to be repulsed by their own Fe as well as others.* That being said, I don't see inferior Fe in you at all. I just see a complete lack of Fe.
> 
> ...


A bit different, though. I whine a lot about my Si being annoying, crap and useless but attempts to gauge at my Fi just turn me inside out. Likewise, Fe is IxTJ's most hated function to use.

P.S. I think INTJ>ISFP are two most possible types. The rest are way less likely.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

I came to think of one thing; In the past I was once typed as an INTJ (just as I've been typed as INFP and INTP aswell). During the period of upholding the "INTJ" personaltiy sign, I came across a link about Perceiver and Contributor INTJs.

Perceiver INTJ:


* *





* Hate social games, and usual rebel when possible and do their best to not comply.
* They don’t respect authority at all unless its proven itself, and even then, they are forever skeptical.
* They have a strong moral compass, and they follow it. They have a very, very strong sense of justice. Pretending to be someone else, i.e. wearing the “social mask” feels dirty, because it is deceptive and not who they really are.
* While most like things, they are less concerned with material matters.
* They do not care what society thinks of them.




Contributor INTJ


* *





* Contributor INTJ’s do care about what society thinks of them. They wear lots of social masks, and they usually wear them well. They play the social game, and they usually do this without being bitter about it (even if it makes them tired).
* They key to understand why they do this, is that they are inherently pragmatic. Socializing is often not natural for them but they learn the skills because it pragmatically assists them in achieving their abstract goals. They don’t have an inherent drive to be liked for the sake of being liked, but they want to achieve their goals.
* They care more about possessions because things help them get other things; contributor INTJ’s do well in sales and business.
* Respect authority more because they take-on social roles when it is necessary.
* Because they are incredibly goal-based, their morals tend to be weaker. They are more likely to blur the lines. They will do things to get ahead. Unlike the perceiver INTJ who doesn’t like to lie about who they are (even if it means achieving their goals will be harder), the contributor will “wear the mask”.




Out of those two descriptions, the Perceiver INTJ description fits me very well. Note that the last point in Contributor INTJ also mentions Perceiver INTJs. But I've to question whether or not you who are here today believes the "Perceiver INTJ" description to characterise 'real' INTJs. To me, the Perceiver INTJ seems to put a lot more value onto Fi in comparision to the Contributor INTJ who puts more value onto Te-Se. Some claimed the Contrbitutor INTJ is in fact an ENTJ, but that's up to interpretation. But if so be the case, is the Perceiver INTJ really an INTJ? I've found a lot of stereotypes in regards to the INTJ and they all seem closer to the Contributor INTJ than the Perceiver INTJ. So my question for you guys are: Does the Perceiver INTJ characterise the INTJ personality type? If (not) so, which type does it characterise the (second) most?


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

I've also read up on ISFP (Mbti) but I cannot relate at all. I understand what it is @The Doctor said about Socionics and MBTI not being compatible at all times. I actually related way more to ESI (socionics) than I did ISFP (MBTI)

Some statements about the ISFP ISFP Personality (â€œThe Adventurerâ€�) | 16Personalities

_"ISFPs live to find ways to push their passions. Riskier behaviors like gambling and extreme sports are more common with this personality type than with others. Fortunately their attunement to the moment and their environment allows them to do better than most. ISFPs also enjoy connecting with others, and have a certain irresistible charm."_

*Due to my kinesthetic clumsiness I avoid risky physical activities and extreme sports. I also avoid risking money on gambling or drawing tickets or anything like that. And I've no attuntement to the moment or environment, nor do i've an irresistible charm.*

_However, if a criticism does get through, it can end poorly. Some ISFPs can handle kindly phrased commentary, valuing it as another perspective to help push their passions in new directions. But if the comments are more biting and less mature, ISFP personalities can lose their tempers in spectacular fashion._

*Say that to someone who's always trying to remain calm and collected.*

_Strength: Charming – People with the ISFP personality type are relaxed and warm, and their “live and let live” attitude naturally makes them likable and popular._

*No, just no. I'm not charming nor warm and I'm the opposite of popular since as @The Doctor said, I lack Fe. I'm surrounded with the same group day out and day in, because I've established a relationship with them in the past. But I do not value popularity, in fact people who tries to be popular annoys me. For as Michell de montaigne put it "Tranquality and fame can never be bedfellows." Thus popularity means a huge amount of Fe to appear likable.*

_Weakness: Overly Competitive – ISFPs can escalate small things into intense competitions, turning down long-term success in their search for glory in the moment, and are unhappy when they lose._

*I don't like competitive people. They drain and thus annoy me.*

_Weakness: Fluctuating Self-Esteem – It's demanded that skills be quantified, but that's hard to do with ISFPs' strengths of sensitivity and artistry. ISFPs' efforts are often dismissed, a hurtful and damaging blow, especially early in life. ISFPs can start to believe the naysayers without strong support._

*No. I've the opposite of fluctuating Self-Esteem. I believe what Protagoras said to be true: "Man is the measure of all things" and as far as my life goes, I'm the one to measure.*

_Weakness: Unpredictable – ISFPs' dislike long-term commitments and plans. The tendency to actively avoid planning for the future can cause strain in ISFPs' romantic relationships and financial hardship later in life._

*It's actually planning for the future that I do. I always try to be prepared for unforeseen events. I also don't indulge in short-time activities if I realize it will harm me in the long run.*

As far as ISFPs go, I won't continue further than 2 pages. I already feel like this description doesn't suit me.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

First and foremost I must admit one thing; I'm way better as discerning the pessimistic than I am at the optimistic. Better at finding the negative than the positive. Better at finding what does not apply to me than what applies to me. Many times I know what I don't want, but not what I want. That's what I found so striking with the ILI description. Hence the above (ISFP) are only what does NOT apply to me. And in a moment I'll do the same with the INTJ stereotype on the same source: INTJ Personality (â€œThe Architectâ€�) | 16Personalities


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

_INTJs are defined by their tendency to move through life as though it were a giant chess board, pieces constantly shifting with consideration and intelligence, always assessing new tactics, strategies and contingency plans, constantly outmaneuvering their peers in order to maintain control of a situation while maximizing their freedom to move about_

*What does 'a tendency to move through life as though it were a giant chess board' tells me about my type? Is it because I do not understand the idiom that I state this, or is it because I find it completely rubbish? For litterally speaking, not once have I compard life to a chess board.*

_The very notion of emotional expression is synonymous with irrationality and weakness to many INTJs, a display of poor self-governance and fleeting opinion that can hardly stand up to the enduring light of factual truth._

*I disagree with this. While I myself am not very capable of expressing emotions outwardly, I do not see it as a weakness without it also being a strength. Due to my calm, level-headed nature I've difficulty reasoning with emotions. As Adolf Hitler put it "I use emotions for the many and reason for the few." I myself am not capable of the former (using emotions), only the latter (using reason). If I were to consider it a weakness, I'd likely consider a scenario where someone is incredibly emotional in tears and refuse to acknowledge reason, calling me cold and emotionless, a robot, for not expressing my emotions in turn. Yes, this can be annoying for me, but I must also acknowledge that it's an annoying state for them to be in. That's why I do not see it as a weakness, but as a temporary psychological state of being. I do definitely not look down on them. On the other hand, being outwardly expressive with emotions can make good speakers if put to their best use. Here is what I lack; I'd like to feel emotions stronger and stronger in a way that I can outwardly express them. Like Martin Luther King or Adolf Hitler for instance. Both had the ability to influence a huge amount of people. That's why it's not a weakness without also being a strength.*

_These feelings are contrary to INTJs' idea of themselves as paragons of logic and knowledge, and they may go so far as to claim they have no emotions at all. This does not mean that people with the INTJ personality type should be seen as, nor should they aspire to be, cold-blooded and insensitive geniuses living by the mantra that emotions are for the weak. INTJs must understand that this isn't the case, and isn't ever going to be._

*There are times I've said "I'm emotionless". But I dared say this because I knew for a fact it wasn't true. I as a human being do have emotions, and I actually feel very vulnerable on the inside. But since I do not express this outwardly in terms of sympathy I may appear like I am emotionless. So when I say I'm emotionless I refer to X definition of it, and X isn't the same as defintion Y (the public). For my idea of emotions seems to vary from the public display of emotions.*

In general, a lot of the description about INTJs applied, or applied somewhat to me. Most of it being neutral area. I feel like all this "Strategic mastermind planner" is an overstatement if I truely am an INTJ. While I do see myself as intellectually gifted, I'm in the end a lathargic person and am nowhere the mastermind stereotype of an INTJ. From an outward perspective, an INTP told me "You're just a man who wants to do nothing". And that is true. I lack a desire for riches and I lack ambition. But I'm not apathetic. I just want to do what I want whenever I want. But unfortunately real life isn't that sweet, which I'll come to face in the near future. And my open-mindedness is also up to question. I personally consider myself an open-minded person, but my INTP friend have accused me of thinking too small. But then again we have two different takes on life: Atheism (him) versus theism (me), science (him) versus spirituality (me). Misanthrope (him) versus indifferent (me), wants to change the world (him) versus fine with the wolrd (me). Sure there are things that could be changed, but why bother to take that up as my mission in life unless I really have to? Right now I don't see it as a must. And politics is way out of the question, for just as Socrates said "I was really too honest a man to be a politician and live" that will likely be the outcome for me aswell. Instead, I'd want the world to be ruled by wise men, like those in Plato's mind. I made a topic about it not long ago: http://personalitycafe.com/critical-thinking-philosophy/570882-should-philosophers-rule-society.html. Anyway, Our concept of truth and a good life is completely different, but despite that I believe we get along well.


----------



## The Doctor (May 29, 2015)

Inheritance said:


> I've also read up on ISFP (Mbti) but I cannot relate at all. I understand what it is @The Doctor said about Socionics and MBTI not being compatible at all times. I actually related way more to ESI (socionics) than I did ISFP (MBTI)
> 
> Some statements about the ISFP ISFP Personality (â€œThe Adventurerâ€�) | 16Personalities
> 
> ...


ISFP has no Fe. The whole "popular" thing doesn't necessarily mean they like popularity. The ISFP I know certainly doesn't. Also, that isn't even necessarily true, because that page can have a lot of things that aren't even based on anything reliable.

I think the best way to tell if you are ISFP is how you feel when you're stressed or in a bad mood. The ISFP I know describes it as a "weird analytical mood," and will nitpick at everything and question the factual basis of everything. Inferior Te.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

I know that ISFPs do not have Fe in their first 4 stacks, but it comes as the 5th. And to compensate for that low order, they've extroverted sensing to attract popularity. For some reason, people seem to be attracted at least in youth, to people with high extroverted sensation. But I may be wrong.

Me in a stressful situation is hard to get a clear grip on me. That's because I rarely fall into a strssful situation. The last time such a thing happened was during a week full of test to study torwards to. I do not think I act much out of the ordinary while in a stressful situation. Physical changes are noticable however; such as twitchings. And I can feel a little more anxiety than usual.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

The last few posts seems to have taken a direction towards the Gamma area. But to merely strive around there would be to dismiss @Lord Fudgingsley efforts. You said you felt some strong Ji (Introverted Judgement I assume it is) in me, which would indicate Fi or Ti. I'm not sure whether or not you have kept up with the latest posts, but if you have: Do you still stand with your former analyses or have you found any additional information that can be useful?


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Different systems. Socionics explores how all 8 functions behave in each type. So ISFP _has_ Fe. In fact it's fairly strong as is their Si.

There's also non-socionics related 8 function model
http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...volving-eight-functions-type-beebe-model.html

By "MBTI ISFP descriptions" you mean those like









Screw those. I in general dislike reading MBTI descriptions ever. Feels like Zodiac but Zodiac at least tries to make all signs sounds awesome.

I've seen a lot of SFPs mistyped as NTJs. Probably the other way around happened too. I'd look at comparing Super-Ego block in both - it's 2 most annoying functions. 4th function is singular most unpleasant to use.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

I just took a SLOAN test for those who prefer key characteristics.
Check the first and last quote bar. Not the middle one.

Global 5: sloan RCOEI; sloan+ rco|e|i; primary Egocentric; R(66%)C(64%)O(62%)E(66%)I(60%)



> withdrawn, not wild and crazy, private, loner, not relationship obsessed, not swayed by emotions, insensitive to the needs of others, unhelpful, interested in intellectual pursuits, avoidant, does not put the needs of others ahead of self, thinks before acting, *very scientific*, not upset by the misfortune of strangers, avoids small talk, values solitude, private, does not get worked up about most things, fearless, unaffected by the suffering of others, calm in crisis, not easily excited, won't do much to avoid rejection, not known for generosity, not easily confused, cold, not prone to complimenting others, dislikes most people but tries to get along to minimize hostility, hard to get to know, more dominant than submissive, not easily hurt, driven by reason, influenced more by self than others, rarely worried, hard to impress, not that interested in relationships, hard to influence, not concerned about failing when trying something new, self confident, knows why they do things, not easily moved to tears, not prone to jealousy, not guided by moods


Actually, I think I fit this description very well. I was thinking of bolding statements that aren't true, but I feel like most apply to me. Thus I could only bold one; "Very Scientific". But I feel like that one is up to interpretation. I do think scientifically, but I do not like science.

On the other hand, the primary type egocentricity does not fit me.

*Bold = Not true*.
*Underline = Don't understand / Not sure*

Primary type: Egocentric



> egocentric, self absorbed, *not loyal*, not generous, only concerned about those close to them, *prone to bitterness*, *can ignore the rights of others*, *narcissist*, *meglomaniac*, *competitive*, *controlling*, *needs to have the upper hand in relationships*, vain, *materialistic*, values indivuality over loyalty, not afraid of conflict, *would pursue a career that was harmful to others*, believes the benefits of freedom outweigh the benefits of attachment, does not value organized religion, does not like to admit making mistakes, *quick tempered*, not traditional, tactless, blunt, suspicious, makes enemies, *wants to be famous*, *prefers technical careers (law, engineering, medicine)*, prefers instant gratification, attracted to prestige, *manipulative*, influenced more by self than others, decisive


I fit more the reserved primary type:



> outsider, does not fit in most places, does not mind going days without speaking to people, does not like night life and crowds, not self expressive, spends more time in solitary activity than group activity, does not compete for the spotlight, *fears getting involved with others*, not seductive, *dresses to avoid standing out*, not impulsive, loner, female introverts tend not to like wearing makeup, does not enjoy leadership, not very sexual, more likely to be nerdy, prefers loose fitting clothing, inhibited, suspicious, tattoo averse, unmotivated, can't do anything when they don't fee good, has trouble speaking when emotional, dislikes compliments, desires security and support, does not like accepting help, more visual than verbal, does not want to be famous, likes science fiction, prefers to stick with things they know, not traditional


*Bold = Not true*
Underlined = 50 / 50 or / Unsure.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

Super ego-block comparision:

*ILI:*

*3. Si Introverted Sensing*

ILIs generally place moderate to minimal importance on such matters as cleanliness, comfort, and sensory stimuli. Some ILIs may consider them distractions. It is not atypical of ILIs to be completely uninterested by and unable to find any value in something like a fine piece of artwork. Different ILIs respond to different artistic stimuli in different ways; for example, an ILI might think painting is worthless but possess sufficient background to enjoy other media, such as sculpture or music.
ILIs are often uncertain about the messages they receive from their bodies. An ILI might feel some irregularity in their own body and not realize its significance to the overall functioning of the body. An ILI will often try to determine the consequence of such symptoms through their own understanding of anatomy (or 'google it'), often blowing things out of proportion. An ILI's sense of self doubt may lead to such assumptions as the presence of a brain tumor as the result of a mere headache. *In contrast to Si valuing types, ILIs are significantly less adept at making adjustments to their lifestyle to correct these minor ailments.*
Even so, ILIs are capable of placing a moderate focus on maintaining their physical comfort. ILIs often construct a lifestyle based on various activities that feed their own intellectual stimulation. Though attention to comfort is never a priority, it is not completely ignored, as some attention to it goes hand in hand with their inactive lifestyle. Still, ILIs often neglect the world around them and become consistently mired in their own inertia, and are unlikely to notice that anything is missing.
ILIs are often hesitant or resistant towards lifestyle changes that threaten the commodiously constructed surroundings that they create for themselves. No one is better suited to opening the ILI for change than the hyperactive SEE, whose flurry of constant activity is seen by the ILI as refreshingly active.

*4. Fe Extraverted Ethics*

ILIs analyze situations and make decisions in a very logical and scientific manner. Their reliance on objectivity and accumulation of factual knowledge leaves very little room for decisions based on emotional considerations. ILIs deeply dislike being asked or coerced to express their emotions. They are most comfortable expressing negative sentiments which indicate their disdain for required emotional participation, such as wry, sardonic pessimism. Some ILIs have very poor control over their emotions, and may lash out angrily if provoked.
When discussing important matters, ILIs often betray a harsh, critical perspective on viewpoints and ideas that they find particularly stupid or insensible. ILIs do not attach emotions to factual information, and so do not consider such criticism to be offensive. If confronted with somebody whose intelligence, persona, or ideas they do not respect, they may react in a hostile fashion, which can be perceived as arrogant or insensitive; not all ILIs, obviously, will react this way.
ILIs' reactions to the sphere of emotions can vary greatly, but they are particularly apparent in the sphere of social relations. ILIs are typically not social creatures. Some do not understand the importance of social connections and choose to ignore the area of emotional involvement with others altogether, instead delving into virtual reality, mystical introspection, or private study. Others trudge through the social landscape without truly understanding the art of socialization, *ignoring politeness and not caring about offending others*. ILIs may view people who constantly try to make others happy as foolishly involving themselves in a completely pointless exercise.
ILIs tend to be nervous about interacting with other people due to lack of confidence in their social abilities, and often feel that they are not socially respected. They find it difficult to gauge a person's mood without an obvious expression or gesture. Only with a small number of people whom the ILI trusts deeply does the ILI let down his emotional guard. To these people, the ILI can be surprisingly sincere and kind. Nonetheless, the ILI will be little more than an acquaintance to the mass of people that the ILI does not completely trust.

*Bold = Not true*

_In contrast to Si valuing types, ILIs are significantly less adept at making adjustments to their lifestyle to correct these minor ailments._
It is true that I'm not very adept at making adjusments to my lifestyle. However, I have a strong power of will and I believe that with sheer willpower I can push myself to do any changes necessary. The issue lies in getting the motivation to do so.

_"ignoring politeness and not caring about offending others"_ 
It's not so much that I ignore politeness and not caring about offending others. It's just that some people are just too offendable about matters that I cannot comprahend. When my classmate saw that the borrowed school PC's deskop had the background of Justin Bieber, she couldn't continue her work until the background was changed. Such a silly move costed her a few minutes that she should rather have put on the topic at hand we were working with. This however, gave me the idea of nicking Justin Bieber in online games. I can't believe how silly it is that some people actually take offense to a random player naming himself a canadian celebrity. What I know of Bieber is limited to what others have told me, for there's nothing I despise more than having chats about the celebrities everyday life. But whatever he has done, I'm indifferent as long as it doesn't concern me in person. Anyway, googling up on "Justin Bieber baby lyrics" and spamming them in the chat seems to have quite the effect. It's actually rather thrilling to see such ignorant willed people actually attempting to throw the game because they're unable to cooperate with someone named Justin Bieber. Just you check the hate comments on the "Baby" song, it's just ridiculous. Matters such as those I do not give 2 cent about offending others about. But if it's about people looking at things from one perspective (face-to-face conversations primarily) I do attempt to choose my words to avoid offending people. If I unjustly offend someone, it takes itself out on my conscience. Just as Michell de Montaigne said "I do myself a greater injury in lying than I do him of whom I tell a lie." and the same applies to unjustly hurting someone else. But as said; If someone is offended by something I cannot help or something that had to come to light; then I can appear rather insensitive.

*ESI:*

*3. Ti Introverted Logic*
The ESI is able to talk about things from a dispassionate academic or theoretical point of view for brief periods of time, but seems overly bookish when doing so and tends to grow tense. When feeling obliged to justify logically a personal decision taken for reasons determined by Fi, the ESI attempts to do so but grows quickly annoyed especially if the inconsistency in the logical argument is pointed out. He then either explains the ethical motivation or avoids the issue altogether.
ESIs see the value of logical consistency in systems for areas or tasks they see as useful, but do not see the point of lingering on that if the pursuit of such consistency deviates too long or deeply from practical reality or from concerns relating to individuals and their relationships, and they are not really interested in discussions by others who choose to do so.

*4. Ne Extraverted Intuition*
The ESI is highly skeptical about ideas and opportunities that may appear not to lead anywhere specifically, and seeks concrete assurance that actual material benefits will be achieved. The ESI prefers the kind of ideation that seems to lead somewhere (offer solutions) rather than the sort that is most likely to bring upheaval and unwanted changes. So they don't want to hear about all the possible problems in a situation, they'd rather hear only the very likely problems if there are any, and the benefits.
The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas. He is inclined to be either over-skeptical of his own potential or going to the other extreme and overestimate his possibilities in specific areas on occasion.
ESIs are often amused by, and attracted to, demonstrations of the intense use of Ne by others if at least tangentially connected to ideas that might have some practical use (Te); but they are repelled by it if used in such a way as to excessively contextualize Fi ethics to the point of irrelevancy.

*Can someone rephrase the below for me? I read it over and over but cannot seem to understand what they're trying to say.*

"The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas."

I'm interpreting it as this: "The ESI dislikes to evaluate other people's potential in activities or their potential to develope skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable when other people evaluates him in such areas. This makes the ESI concerned about the impressions he makes on other people in those areas."

I don't dislike evaluating other people. And I'm not very concerned about the impressions I give others. As Aristotle said: "To avoid criticism say nothing, do nothing, be nothing." People will always evaluate. And more often than not it won't be constructive critisism that will be evaluated. That's why I've stopped giving a rat's ass about impressing others. I want to impress myself. But it is true that I'm uncomfortable at times when other evaluates me. Not superficial matters such as if I beat my speed record in a marathon, but more when it comes to emotional evaluations. That's a matter I wish to keep to myself.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

"The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself."
Doesn't like to guess how it "might be".

"above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself."
No necessary criticism, just people making assumptions about them.

"This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas."
Not sure whether it meant that talking to others about impressions ESI makes on them, makes ESI worry about making impressions or in general are worried about making impressions. I have 2 close Fi dom friends but I can't remember either of them talking about this. I know they both feel dejected if their self-expression if criticized but both are likely to move away from "negative" people than stop it.

"ESIs are often amused by, and attracted to, demonstrations of the intense use of Ne by others if at least tangentially connected to ideas that might have some practical use (Te); but they are repelled by it if used in such a way as to excessively contextualize Fi ethics to the point of irrelevancy."
This is funny because true. Cliched but my ISFP friend is artist and uses me as wild ideas generator for her paintings sometimes.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

> Doesn't like to guess how it "might be".


I'm always hypothesizing about how things might be rather than participating in it myself. If I come to participate in it, it's always after I've first hypothesized about if it's something for me and how it would make me feel. 



> No necessary criticism, just people making assumptions about them.


Most assumptions made about me would be negative ones on first sight. I can see various people looking at me, thinking "He's original, nerdish, bookwormish, weird, aloof, unsocial, eccentric, unconventional, boring..." and the list goes on. As long as those people aren't of high social status, I simply don't give a rat's ass whatever assumption they make up about me. If they were of high social status and have the ability to make me disappear, then I'd merely be uncomfortable as far as my own life goes. I'd likely however not compromise my principles even if I've to end up like Socrates. That's because most men I come across today are stupid. And to avoid assumptions you've to chosen fame over tranquality. For fame and tranquality can never be bedfellows. Yes, I quoted that from Michell de Montaigne. And I'd also like to quote Aristotle "To avoid criticism say nothing, do nothing, be nothing." and not necessary critisim, but assumptions for that matter aswell.



> Not sure whether it meant that talking to others about impressions ESI makes on them, makes ESI worry about making impressions or in general are worried about making impressions. I have 2 close Fi dom friends but I can't remember either of them talking about this. I know they both feel dejected if their self-expression if criticized but both are likely to move away from "negative" people than stop it.


I do not mind talking about *negative* impressions I made about X to X. Notice that I emphasized negative, for positive is a different story. The reason talking about negative impressions is uncomfortable to me is because people more often than not take critisism to heart. And I would prefer to avoid hostility and conflict. It's just too draining of energy trying to reason with someone unwilling of reasoning back. Worst case it can even escalate into a physical fight. Which is why I tend to keep negative impressions to myself unless I deem it wiser to tell it that point, or at a later stage. If I'm talking about *negative* impressions of X to Y, then I don't tend to have any issues, provided X isn't Y close. The only times I'm basically not uncomfortable in a direct face-to-face conversation, pointing out the negative is when I'm unable to keep myself calm and collected.

And I do not tend to feel dejected if my self expression is criticized. Afterall "Man is the measure of all things" just as Protagoras said. Instead, I'd look up with them the reasons as to why they criticized the parts they did. And I'm more likely to focus on the parts they disagreed with me on than the parts they agreed with me. For criticism goes two ways: the agreements and the disagreements. but since we're already in agreement about the agreements, that does not matter. Once he told me why he disagrees with me, I'd try to debate with him to make sure he understood my point of view correctly. If I fail however, then that's that. I can't change his view, but unless he provides me a good motive to change mine I won't compromise either. No hard feelings.



> This is funny because true. Cliched but my ISFP friend is artist and uses me as wild ideas generator for her paintings sometimes.


Does any "tangetially connected to ideas that might have some practical use" examples come to mind? And the same with "excessively contextualize Fi ethics to the point of irrelevancy".


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Inheritance said:


> Does any "tangetially connected to ideas that might have some practical use" examples come to mind? And the same with "excessively contextualize Fi ethics to the point of irrelevancy".


Tangentially connected ideas - something that can be implemented in whatever ESi interested in. As I said, my ISFP friend uses me when she feels dry on painting ideas but still wants to paint something.

"excessively contextualize Fi ethics to the point of irrelevancy" Well, in my case I suspect it could be refering to


> In more extreme circumstances, the ILE will see morality as just another system to be taken apart and studied, shocking types who value moral traditions when he uses logic and his clever insight to dissolve moral imperatives. e.g. "You may view human sacrifice as something inherently wrong but that's just a result of your upbringing. If you were raised an Aztec you would have seen it as a remarkable thing, believing it to be responsible for keeping your crops watered and the sun moving across the sky."


Aka overusing "Whatever you feel about this could be different if you were raised in a different way or in a different time". I can be really annoying to FPs this way. My ESFP friend didn't talk to me for awhile after I dissected book he liked and reasons he liked it.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

That makes it more clear, thanks!

_"Tangentially connected ideas - something that can be implemented in whatever ESi interested in."_ 
I don't see a need for ideas in fields I'm not interested in. Then again, I tend to be interested in a lot of abstract ideas. But certainly would I like them the more if they can be 1. implemented and 2. in whatever I'm interested in.

_"As I said, my ISFP friend uses me when she feels dry on painting ideas but still wants to paint something."_
Lets exclude the painting part and focus merely on ideas; I tend to generate those on my own without consulting others. Only when I can't seem to generate any ideas will I consult others who are likely to provide ideas. But usually I won't stick to these ideas generated. No, the ideas generated helps me generate my own ideas through adding or subtracting. But if I were her (your ISFP friend) I'd likely not paint until I generated a new idea on my own even if I felt like painting. 

_"Whatever you feel about this could be different if you were raised in a different way or in a different time"_
That is true. I'll use a real example I had with my INTP friend (Who's an atheist) when we were speaking about the concept of god. He says that he can't get himself to kneel before anyone, not even god. I then told him "I know how you feel. For as I stand here today, I feel the same. Kneeling infront of someone else is abnormal, something I'm not accustomed to. But if I were born in the garden of Eden? Then I'd likely consider it abnormal not to bow before god". So yes, whatever you feel about X depends on how you were raised and when you were raised.

_"How are you sure that what you feel is true if only you can feel it?"_
This is indeed true. I'd like to say "It is true since I feel it to be true". But that doesn't work. I'll illustrate this through using another example. If I say that I'd like to run for the next Dictator to rule this country. I know myself very well; And through honest assessments I can tell that I've no ulterior motives. All I want is to create a country good for my people. But would it go that smooth? If someone else said the same thing, I'd look at them with suspicion. In my heart I'd say "How can we with certainty know that what you speak of is true? How can we know there lies no hidden motives?" Since I'd be skeptical towards someone else, even if they said the exact same thing as I did, I expect the same in return. That's why I'm open-minded to people questioning whether what I feel to be true, actually is true.

_"My ESFP friend didn't talk to me for awhile after I dissected book he liked and reasons he liked it."_
Now I don't know the background story, but that doesn't make sense to me. This makes me think of the F / T differences. This now varies completely on whether it is Fe or Fi, but usually Feeling types tend to be accociated with offering emotional support to people when they most need it while Thinker types on the other hand offers a solution. It's important for the thinker types to realize that a solution isn't always what the person wants the most. Perhaps they already have a solution, yet crave emotional support to get the energy to continue. This is something alien to many thinker persons I've noticed. Personally I'm not a bastion of emotional support, I'm more on offering a solution. But I'm willed to see it from the perspective that it isn't always wanted for.

Now, why did I bring this up? You dissecting his book and the reasons he liked it remembers me of the above. He being the feeler and you being the thinker. Therefore I can understand that he may have seen it as uncalled for. But either were you a merciless beast when taking it apart and reconstructing it with your Ne-Ti or his feelings for the book didn't run that deep. My INTP friend have ripped my arguments apart quite a few times when we were discussing the concept of god, but that doesn't mean I change my believes, nor does it mean that I distance myself from him for a while. For we both share this kind of view: "You may believe something, but don't you dare force it on me". Now the INTP part got quite off-topic about you and the ESFP; but I felt like sharing it.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

I'm going to go INTJ for you.

If you want fresh outside opinion (since my is in a way is "tainted" now) you can try making new thread here _or_ on socionics "What's my type?" forum section.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

@Greyhart
I could very well do that. But between a new topic here and on on the socionics forums, it's more likely I'll make one on the socionics side. Though I'd prefer to advertise this topic the most.

Also, are by any chance into enneagram? I took a trifix test a few days ago and got 

* *




6w5 , 1w2, 4w5



But I don't know.


----------



## Inheritance (Jul 20, 2014)

Alright, I made a socionics post here: http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-socionics-type/609394-21q-socionics-questionnaire.html


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Inheritance said:


> <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> @<span class="highlight"><i><a href="http://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=168994" target="_blank">Greyhart</a></i></span>
> <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> I could very well do that. But between a new topic here and on on the socionics forums, it's more likely I'll make one on the socionics side. Though I'd prefer to advertise this topic the most.
> ...


There's also help me with my enneagram type section. Although you might just want to go to specific type's forums and read stickies.

Type 6 and video.


----------

