Here I Slay The 80Q Beast - Page 2

Here I Slay The 80Q Beast

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 17 of 17
Thank Tree20Thanks

This is a discussion on Here I Slay The 80Q Beast within the What's my Socionics type? forums, part of the Socionics Forum category; double post!...

  1. #11

    double post!
    Last edited by Gorgon; 04-25-2019 at 11:44 PM.

  2. #12

    @Gorgon this looks like an Ethical type's answers. With a special like for Ti yet not Ti in ego since not taking it seriously enough for that. You disliked Te and really avoided reasoning in a Te manner, safe to say it's devalued and weak.

    A load of interest and manner of reasoning and good skills in terms of Fe. Very poetic and emotional. The interest in Ni/Se is obvious as well...

    I would guess IEI.

  3. #13

    @Gorgon Examples:

    "1. General to specific, specific to general – what does it mean?

    When I think about general to specific I'm thinking of applying a general concept to a specific situation. For example testing out the principles of thermodynamics in a chemistry lab to compare the mass of specific reactants to the mass of their product. I see it as testing out the applicability and universality of a concept. The specific to the general is finding patterns throughout various events and situations and forming a broad concept or opinion from those instances. Both avenues are great for classification, just look at biology and how it classifies organisms. Felix (specific)>domestic cat>feline>mammal>animal (general)."

    ---> Quite the Ti focus. But it seems filtered through Ni conceptual pattern seeking.

    "2. What does "logical" mean? What is your understanding? Do you think that it correlates with the common view?

    All logic is are a set of axioms used to construct and determine the validity and soundness of an argument. It's highly formulaic, and the external validity of the premises don't necessarily have to be true as long as the conclusion correctly follows from the premise. I think the colloquial view of logic is mistaken as rationality or what generally makes sense. Rationality does involve logic, but it also involves more nuanced and more holistic thinking."

    ---> This really ignores Te. Not interested in external factualness, just focused on internal logical consistency.

    "Organizationally, I'm not opposed to hierarchy, even strict a hierarchy. Though I'm more inclined to support a more horizontally organized system that operates like a cooperative or a syndicate where people work in positions that cater to their strengths, a strict hierarchy has it's place to a degree. Hierarchy becomes problematic when it comes overly bureaucratic, inefficient, and unjust."

    -> Beta Ti view, but "lax" enough to say Ti is probably not ego Ti. Focused on Intuitive views on capabilities more.

    "2. Is it acceptable to express emotions? Give examples of inappropriate expression of emotions.

    Yeah why not? That's the most human thing to do. I sometimes wish people were more honest in expressing how they feel, if only people were brought up learning how to authentically and effectively express their emotions. I would think the rate of violence would partially go down.

    Obvious examples of inappropriate emotional expression would be loudly raging in the library. There's heartfelt and passionate emotional expression, and there's crossing bounds of reason."

    ---> Strongly skilled and natural view about Fe.

    "3. Can you use negative emotions? In what situations?

    I mainly use anger as a motivator for myself. Anger is one hell of energizer and anesthetic. But due to taking meds, my negative moods are less severe, and I need new sources of inspiration and creativity. I've found seeking meaningful and soulful experiences to be more of a sustainable motivator than anger will ever be. Apart from that, I'm pretty numb to other negative emotions as they mostly get filtered through anger."

    ---> Emotions as a strong source of inspiration and creativity... quite the NF view.

    Along with viewing anger from an Fe emotion view: "one hell of energizer and anesthetic".

    "7. Can you change the emotional state of yourself? Of others? To what side – positive or negative?

    I can easily put myself in a mood if I tried. As for affecting other people's mood, sure, if I'm being consciously mindful of that. I probably do affect other people's emotions without me realizing how."

    Strong ego skills for Fe.

    "1. What is work in your opinion? Why do people go to work? Are there any parameters where you can distinguish whether you can do this work or not?

    I actually think the notion and nature of work is a lot more complicated than people give it credited for. It's not just a means for survival, it's a process that encapsulates our values, mindset, and passions. Even if you're in a job you don't like, you're there for a reason (besides survival). If it's a temporary job, you're working towards a bigger goal. Work takes up the majority of our day and lives so there needs to be a deeper examination, on an existential level, on how it affects us, how we view ourselves and others, and so on."

    ---> NF views instead of the "dry" Te.

    "4. How do you feel if you didn't finish some work? Does it ever happen? What are the reasons?

    I hate leaving things unfinished, it leaves a hole in my heart ��. But of course it does occur due to lack of time or interest."

    ---> Really Fe phrasing instead of Te lol

    "1. What is beauty? Do you change your opinion about beauty? Does your understanding correlate with the generally accepted notion? What goes beyond the generally accepted notion?

    Beauty is symmetry. It's aesthetic harmony. It's aspirational. But ugliness can also be beautiful. There is something refreshing about something that's so unrepentantly discordant and unfiltered. There's no explanation, there's no justification, it's just is. I think that's why I'm so drawn to the morbid and grotesque because it's a monkey wrench to the symbolic order. There's no pleasing, there's no enticement, it's pure ugly truth. I've always hated the aspirational nature of beauty, I've always found it deceptive and oppressive to some degree. Fuck platonic objects! But there's truth in it's idealism, romanticism, and deception. The gloss betrays the values of a society and what they hold in importance. In deception, you'll find more truth than truth plainly revealed."

    ---> So much Ni and Beta NF.

    "10. How do you understand if a person is strong? Are there any signs of a strong person? What is the core of any force? Why do people listen to one person, but not the other?

    A strong person has resolve first and foremost, and this resolve can manifest in a multitude of ways. It can even manifest as kindness and compassionate. The strongest people are people who are courageous enough to be kind and principled even if it's easier and more profitable to be otherwise. If that's not resolve, I don't know what is."

    ---> IEI views on top of the Se valuing. BTW I like this perspective. :)

    I think that should be enough examples.

    Can I ask about this one, just personal curiosity: "I mainly use anger as a motivator for myself. Anger is one hell of energizer and anesthetic. But due to taking meds, my negative moods are less severe, and I need new sources of inspiration and creativity. I've found seeking meaningful and soulful experiences to be more of a sustainable motivator than anger will ever be. Apart from that, I'm pretty numb to other negative emotions as they mostly get filtered through anger."

    What kind of meaningful and soulful experiences do you find to be a real source of motivation?
    Gorgon thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements

  5. #14

    @tower thanks for the input and breakdown :) I'll answer the last question a bit later when I have some down time.

  6. #15

    @tower I want to provide greater context to when I made this thread. At the time, I had untreated bipolar. I wasn't on medication or attending counseling when in reality I should've. I attributed my mental illness to a complex form of severe depression where alongside the typical symptoms of depression, I also experienced prolonged episodes of anger. I very rarely exploded but more often than not I just the anger simmer. It wasn't until January of this year that I got it properly treated, and I feel more "like myself." I'm still a fairly intense/brooding personality but I'm not as volatile and rage-filled as I used to be. Plus, I've been experiencing a clarity of mind I haven't experienced in years. Nonetheless, in combination with the mental illness and meds, it has changed my relationship to emotions and emotionality. These days especially, I put saturnine limits on the expression of certain sentiments: there really is an economy of emotions being strictly regulated. There's an annoyance at emotionally-driven people which I think is due to my devaluation of the feminine or that aspect of the feminine - the lunarian drive that channels ones emotions and instincts as opposed to the masculine solarian drive that governs and sublimates those instincts and emotions. I wrote a facebook post further illuminating this:

    I find overly emotional people and those submerged in their own feelings and passions both infuriating and morbidly fascinating. On the one hand, I deem them lacking in discipline, self-control, and and a level of intelligence (for some people, not strictly on principle). But a kernel of curiosity creeps up in me because these types people represent the Other to me, a sort of animus. They posses a type of access to reality and wisdom that I don't have access to nor do I entirely understand. I wouldn't say I'm so cut off from my own emotions that I can't glean the value and messages they put forth, but I do experience a level of detachment from them. Except anger. Anger is really the only emotion that I experience viscerally and immediately, but even anger gets filtered under layers of meta-analysis and scrutiny. When I do get submerged in my own emotions, I experience it as suffocating, indulgent, and self-absorbed, so I'm projecting that onto the animus. And that projection leads to feeling a mixture of both hate and curiosity.

    I'm also not one to separate the logical mind and emotions in a way that's framed in mutual exclusion. One can have logical reasons and rationale for the emotional reactions one has as one can implement a logical process/method to achieve an emotionally-driven goal. Though I should separate logic from rationality. Logic, in it's reductionistic form, is computational. It operates purely on a mechanistic cause and effect principle: emotional sentiments play no role in its operation. Rationality on the other hand takes on a holistic point of view that takes into account the nuances of both mechanistic, emotional, and existential operations and how they intersect. There's no Cartesian-like split between emotions and logic, but rather a set of relations.
    To further clarify the quote, I don't necessarily associate emotionality with feelers/ethicians. The thinking and feeling functions are both rational frameworks through which we metabolize information. The feeling functions have less to do with emotions and affectivity and more to do with ethical reasoning. In Cognitive Types (in both the book and on the website) feeling is associated with biotic thinking since it's primary concern is the life principle - the relationship and interconnectedness between all living things and this can be demonstrated through seeing the inner essence of all livings or the the influencing the affective atmosphere of an environment to steer it towards a certain direction. Even though I stated that the feeling function has less to do with emotions, it is tied closely to the emotional register - an awareness of their own and others feelings, the implications of those feelings, and how to express and navigate those emotions. So a feeling type can easily logically explain and navigate the emotional register of a situation, something that a thinking type is ill-equipped to do.

    Citing the same source, the thinking function is associated with abiotic reasoning since it's less concerned with the life principle and more concerned with the principle of deduction - if, then cause and effect. It views the world through a mechanical process. The thinking function is dissociated from the emotional register - either not recognizing it or viewing it as another data point. With that, there's a certain lack of investment in the self. At the extreme end, it's highly logical but amoral. Luckily, these functions operate on an axis, so one cannot operate without the other.

    I operate somewhere in the middle. Well I'd like to think I embody a synthesis between the two.

    What kind of meaningful and soulful experiences do you find to be a real source of motivation?
    That's a really good question and I'm still in the process of sussing this out. Lately, I've been getting into meditation and trying to exercise more (trying is the operative word here hahaha). I've also been delving heavily into esoterica and the mystical traditions of the big 3 monotheistic religions (Gnosticism, Kabbalah, and Sufism). At this juncture in my life, I've been thinking and operating with a more spiritual framework as a consequence of my studies. I used to be so wrapped up in my own darkness and destructive tendencies but my life mission, so to speak, is to use the shadow as a means for further integration and understanding the self and others. To repress the shadow only forces it exert its influence in more insidious ways, so it is better to acknowledge it and work with it. A lot has changed between when I made this thread and now.
    Last edited by Gorgon; 04-26-2019 at 10:55 PM.

  7. #16

    Hey I won't read this wall of text of yours, however I respect you for your perseverance and endurance which is required to write such long posts!
    Gorgon thanked this post.

  8. #17

    Quote Originally Posted by Gorgon View Post
    Everyone who said ILI for me was correct (I typed at ESI when I made this thread nearly 2 years ago). This recent thread I made will shed light on this:
    @Lord Fenix Wulfheart I don’t know if you’re still active around these parts.
    I am not active, no. I just logged in for the first time in many months.

    I haven't reread the thread, but I vaguely recall typing you as Gamma NT, I think extroverted? Glad you found typology useful, either way. :)
    Gorgon thanked this post.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. [ISTJ] Does anyone here NOT love the Big Bang Theory?
    By MBTI Enthusiast in forum ISTJ Forum - The Duty Fulfillers
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-23-2011, 04:46 PM
  2. Here to repopulate the ESFP's
    By emptypaperbag in forum Intro
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-24-2010, 03:22 AM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-04-2010, 01:32 AM
  4. Newbie here. Just got the welcome letter
    By thedoubter in forum Intro
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-28-2009, 03:23 AM
  5. Click here to save the world!
    By MysteryOfHistory in forum Intro
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-14-2009, 09:00 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:51 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0