Don't tell me I did this 80-question thing for nothing :) (Type me please)

Don't tell me I did this 80-question thing for nothing :) (Type me please)

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Results 1 to 10 of 10

This is a discussion on Don't tell me I did this 80-question thing for nothing :) (Type me please) within the What's my Socionics type? forums, part of the Socionics Forum category; I am new to socionics and I want to shed some light on some of its more complex functions and ...

  1. #1

    Don't tell me I did this 80-question thing for nothing :) (Type me please)

    I am new to socionics and I want to shed some light on some of its more complex functions and maybe use it as a cornerstone for MBTI direction since people refuse to type me in that thread too... Okay, without further ado. (This will be longer compared to others...)


    Block I

    1.General to specific, specific to general – what does it mean?
    It means relating from* overarching overlapped categories of subjects to subject itself as a point of view, which may contain potentials for all the overarching categories it belongs to/ used in depending on the point of interest. :) Depending on what is a focal point this may change, though, as subject may contain specifics from the point of view of which the oneness of the subject may be considered general not specific as before as it contains other potentials in itself too.

    2. What does "logical" mean? What is your understanding? Do you think that it correlates with the common view?
    Logical means accurate in evaluation of the thing in reality, mental reproduction of it* and strategic, as in adequately knowing what your actions will lead to based on that mental model you create. Being logical is impossible without a) being observant b) being bias free c) being exact d) being honest* Truly logical decisions are those that foresee long time effects and are made with them in mind. Yes, I don't think I said anything new here.

    3. How do you explain fractions on the dial of the clock?
    Can we not, teach?...

    4. What is a rule? What rules do you have to follow?
    Rules are limitations that are made to direct your actions and they are neither good not bad by default because it depends on who is enforcing them and what this direction is.*

    5. What is hierarchy? Do you need to follow it? Why or why not?
    Hierarchies, much like the rules, are made for ease of command in serving some goal. First of all, we need to ask ourselves what goal do we serve and whether it is just. Then you can decide whether to serve it or not. Some people give fake examples of hierarchies, like the natural world - the strong trample the weak. Since such "hierarchy" doesn't serve any goal but violence, lust and power it is not really a hierarchy. And any human hierarchy that shows that animal tendencies must be disobeyed since it is corrupt. Hierarchies serve the goal not further personal desires.

    6. What do you think of instructions? Do you use them? Could you write an instruction manual? If so, what type of instruction manual would you most likely write?
    Instructions are to be followed to avoid hazard, it is not really a choice or a personal preference. I would most likely write an art tool manual since I am an artist.

    7. Please explain: "Freedom is in complying with the laws, but not in ignoring the laws"? Do you agree with the statement? Why?
    Yes, I agree. You can't be free at the expense of others, it's not freedom then but selfishness.*

    8. Tell us how about consistent you are?
    Not consistent. I am basically many people in one handy package.I am a disoriented squad held together by sappy values you will read about below!

    9. What is a "standard"? Why do people need it?
    Standard in what? In personalities, behaviors, looks? no thank you. In art, science, politics? More standards please and make them stricter so the quality of life improves and the progress becomes achievable.

    10. You need to put your home library in order. How do you feel about this activity? How will you approach this task?
    I don't care about organizing tasks at all. I will just leave books all over the place - they way the will naturally end up anyway if I do indeed read them and not just put them on shelves for show.*

    Block II

    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?
    Work is just two things: means of survival and the method of improving the world. All work in the world is either of these two.

    2. Is there any correlation between quality and quantity? Tell us if or how the price depends on quality?
    Price sometimes reflects quality but not always. Price is a complex, political issue. Most of the time, something costs a lot just because it is sold in an overpriced neighborhood and shop owners have to pay a lot for rent. I feel like the times of realistic prices are gone since at least late 19th century.

    3. How do people determine the quality of work? How do you determine such quality? How well you can determine the quality of any purchase, do you pay any attention to it?
    It is too much of an abstract question. What kind of work? You know, the work as writing a book and the work as pouring cement on the streets have different criteria of evaluation. All I can say that I value feeling like the person doing the work was thinking, applying their understanding to the full. A lot of people value workaholism, effort but not me. I just want to see, through your work, that you understand what you are talking about.

    4. How do you feel if you didn't finish some work? Does it ever happen? What are the reasons?
    Depends on the kind of work. If it was just normal work I'd be happy to wing it and relax. But if it's something important to me, I'd chastise myself for being unable to finish. Sometimes I'd even cry. However, I'd get over it pretty quickly too. I prefer starting anew, with new understanding of things.

    5. What is "interesting work" for you? Please explain in detail.
    Interesting work is the kind of work that allows you to learn many new things, in my case, things about cultures and languages and also the kind of work where you can experiment and create something freely with low levels responsibility for the outcome.

    6. You go to the store and see something you're interested in buying; there is a price tag on it. What parameters are you going to use to understand if it's overpriced, underpriced, or priced correctly?
    The more important an object is to my wellbeing,the better quality it has to be. Anything else can be cheap.

    7. When you work and someone tells you: "You don't do it right." What is your reaction?
    I don't know why but people tell me that all the time and it irritates me because I've seen other people who do worse and are applauded. I give off an air of incompetence, I guess which is just my air of carelessness that isn't necessarily incompetence but just laziness and desire to be free of responsibility. I actually like being competent but I dislike when people demand competence in too many things from me because I just like to do what I am best at.

    8. There is a professional right next to you. You always see that you can't perform the way they do. Your feelings, thoughts and actions?
    I don't care, for the most part. To me success is sometimes on a phillosophical level, just being an overachiever won't cut it. I envy not performances but overall lifestyles and mindsets of people. Of course I may feel inadequate sometimes but it depends on many factors. I do envy someone who is more adaptable and fast than me because I think I am quite flexible myself. Talented people who are younger than me sometimes provoke this reaction in me and I am not proud of it. At the end of the day, everyone moves at different speed, comparisons are pointless.

    9. When you have to ask someone else to help you with the task, how do you feel?
    Sad. I like to be independent and this is obviously admitting my lack of skill and dependency. However, sometimes the task is so important I don't care about such things. It depends.

    10. You need to build a pyramid exactly like in Egypt. Your thoughts, feelings and actions?
    Why do I need to build a pyramid exactly like in Egypt? I won't build it as well as original builders anyway.

    Block III

    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 cultural context and nothing more. The notions of beauty change all the time but something that doesn't change is the fact that it's deeply rooted in culture and also differs from culture to culture. For me personally, beauty is understanding the story behind something. I can't call someone or something beautiful without knowing their mind or its historical significance when it comes to places. Talking about purely visual side, I tend to like people who remind me of some cultural archetypes I like, I like people who embody some emotional traits I value. To me, there is nothing more wonderful than outward expression of internal emotion via everything - face, pose and even clothes. And certain ungliness is welcome here because ugliness is even more loaded with emotion than pure beauty. So, beauty is emotion for me - either through association or memory or through firsthand experience.

    Since I am obsessed with ugliness, eccentricity and general complex aesthetics, not many people share my perception of beauty, especially those people who are hung up on physical perfection. I dislike the idea of symmetry especially and I always wonder why people claim something so unnatural can be beautiful and preferable. At least some people share my notion that beauty is always natural. Needless to say, I hate modern ideas of beauty which is always very fake, unoriginal and oversexed.

    2. Please describe your understanding of a beautifully dressed person. What is the core of beauty? How do you explain what is beautiful to a person who has never heard about beauty before?
    It depends on the context. I am not very picky when it comes to looks and sometimes people invent outfits that expand my already wide understanding of beauty. :) The core of beauty is the same as in art - intentional improvisation and expression of emotion that's appropriate for the occasion. I can only say that personally I prefer more effortless and even slightly messy looks, especially on men. To me, such things like hair gel, dyed hair, piercings, complex haircuts only make most men look worse. You just have to be clean and relaxed - that's all. Not sure I'd be able to explain the idea of beauty to someone like this since I already said that beauty is context. Technically, dumb people will never know beauty because beauty demands brains to decipher by default. :)

    3. Is there a template of understanding what beautiful means for everyone to use? Is there such a term as "classical beauty"? If so, what is it?
    A template? Never. It is not only personal but also mostly depends on the country of living. For example, I see many Americans obsessing after sporty looks to the point non-muscular men feel inferior. As an European who is not sporty myself (nothing against sports though) I feel intimidated by muscular men and they are literally my least favorite type. I don't want to be with someone who looks like he can accidentally crush me. And American women, conversely, feel safe with this kind of guy. To them muscular= bodyguard, father, to me muscular = criminal. That example may be shallow but it just shows the difference in context.
    There is no such thing as classic beauty and the very notion of it is annoying to me. :)

    4. What is comfort? What is coziness? How do you create your comfort and coziness? How do others evaluate your skill in doing so? Do you agree with them?
    I desire comfort strongly but I am not sure I am capable of creating it. I may obsess over aesthetics but I am actually a messy person who hates cleaning. However, it depends what you mean by comfort?

    5. How do you pick your own clothes? Do you follow fashion? Why? Do you know how to select clothes for different types of figures?
    I only dress for comfort. I actually give better fashion advice for others than I give for myself. I am a fashion nerd in a way. Not the fashionable kind. For me it's like being a military history freak (by the way, I may a bit of that too, I am interested in historical fashion/ military uniforms much more than modern clothes).

    6. How do you cook? Do you follow recipes? What do others think of your skill?
    I am incapable of cooking. I am trying to learn but I just hate the process.

    7. Are you good at color patterns and mixing them and matching?
    I am very cautious with mixing and matching because while I have good eye for quality items, my tastes are random and as result my wardrobe is not coordination-friendly. :)

    8. If someone is telling you what is beautiful and what is not, what goes with what color and what is not, do you agree with this person?
    Not only I am often suspicious about opinions of others but this is also the topic I feel strongly about so I will most likely disagree. However, I don't think my opinion is more valuable here - everyone perceives beauty differently. I'd just agree to disagree. However, if they would insist that their kind of beauty is "right' and mine is wrong,..I may get angry about this.

    9. Tell us how you'd design any room, house or an office. Do you do it yourself or trust someone else to do it?
    Why?

    If I could design a room, any room, I'd prefer it to be designed in accordance with the rules of some famous style/school of architecture. First, I'd have to learn the basics of that classic style and then, when I am confident I can experiment, I'd add my own style but within the tradition because I want to preserve the historical context of the style. I'd also want to design something very natural, maybe even farmer-house like. I like things that are so raw and natural it's even a bit strange.

    10. How do you know if a person has bad taste? Could you give us an example? Do you always trust your own taste or do you seek opinions from others?
    A lack of taste is simply a lack of intelligence. No clothes or art can be called objectively bad, everything can be worn or shown in the right place and time. A lack of cultural awareness and awareness of the situation of a wearer or artist is what constitutes bad taste. I often find it funny when people criticize eccentric clothes or paintings saying they are "ugly". Intentional "ugliness" is not ugliness per as, it's eccentric and it's fun. Most often, in both art, fashion or writing, INTENT is what separates a genius from a fool. You can't be "accidentally" fashionable or eloquent. Everything intentional and full of cultural context is fashionable.
    Do I trust the opinion of others? Hm, it depends. I am not surrounded by some fashion aficionados in my life and neither I am one myself, however, amongst my friends, I guess I am the one who is most hung up on the aesthetics. I feel like I have good taste overall but I am bad at matching items. I am a bit prone to collecting things that look good on me just in theory or in my mind but not in reality because in reality I don't know how to wear them. :) However, in art, I trust my opinion the most because I am an artist and I spend a lot of time analyzing it.

    Block IV

    1. Can you line up human resources and make them do things? What methods do you use? Can you press people? If so, how does it happen?
    Don' think so. I am not charismatic enough for that and neither do I desire to command people. I derive strength from other things. Managing people is extremely tiresome and boring. Also, everyone always thinks that people in positions of authority feel like gods but in reality, the masses rule over them. And if they don't, its just means they are tyrannical.
    What is incursion? How do you deal with this? Can you repulse? How easy can you do it?

    2. What is incursion? How do you deal with this? Can you repulse? How easy can you do it?
    First we need to figure out what kind of war we are f*cking fighting and for what, what results will be. You can do many things for the right goal. I can't say without knowing such a goal, war is not an abstraction, it's history.

    3. What does "my people" and "strangers" mean? When do "my people" become "strangers" and why?
    I don't know what you are talking about here. I just don't use this line of thinking at all. People are always both strangers and friends to you, depending on what part of their personality takes over. However, I know for sure that people who revel in destruction and suffering of others will never be close to me. It doesn't mean I like only nice people, I am fairly generous with mistakes people commit but there is a line there that I hope most people won't cross. But I guess I also will never become close with someone who doesn't speak the same emotional language as me. And that's why I don't have many friends.

    4. Are there strategies of attack? Can you use them? When is it justified?
    Attack on what? As in military attack? I am not qualified to say. I think diplomacy is always smarter and more strategic. In fact, courtroom battles and diplomatic battles are those that need to be fought most often.

    5. Do you think it's ok to occupy someone else's territory? In what situations?
    Never.

    6. What are the methods of volitional force? When is it most effective and in what situations?
    Since I don't know much about this, I don't feel qualified enough to say.

    7. How do you protect yourself and your interests?
    Passively, without wasting too much energy but stubbornly. I can also use some manipulation which works even better but I need some time to think it over beforehand. I may also just leave the confrontation altogether. It is not that I don't believe in confrontation, I just haven't seen any results of it.

    8. Describe your behavior in the situations of opposition and if you have to use some force?
    I rarely use force but when I do, I am often very angry and use very sharp words to express my displeasure. If I am not completely outraged by someone’s behavior then I'll use sly methods most of the time.

    9. Do others think of you as a strong person? Do you think you are a strong person?
    I don't believe in absolute strength, only relative one. All people are capable of different things and what's easy for some is difficult for others. Even if absolute strength does exist, we still don't know what it is because all definitions of strength so far are too physically inclined.

    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?
    As I said before, there is no absolute strength but I noticed that people who are both very adaptable and very persistent in the same time, are what can be called as "strong". The strength is ability to change with circumstances and yet preserve your values and goals. I feel like unlike masculinity and physical strength it is even more difficult to achieve but it is an ideal everyone can strive for nonetheless.
    Last edited by kaelze; 11-16-2019 at 03:28 AM.



  2. #2

    Block V

    1.What is boorishness? Does your understanding of it correlate with the generally accepted notion? How would you explain what boorishness mean to a 10 year old child? How would you explain the same to an adult who does not behave ethically?
    Is it really right to engage a rude person? The very definition of rude is someone who is defiant and resistant to empathy, pleas of others to understand them. I feel like you can't change someone's bad behavior on the spot. Rude people need to be taught, taught by people with a lot of authority and correct kind of values. It is impossible to change rude child's behavior either. Unfortunately, I am surrounded by very rude children in my daily life. And yeah, I tried to correct their behavior. Needless to say...it's absolutely pointless. It is not my job either. The best we can do is just create a society that gives birth to more people with leadership qualities that are capable of changing others.

    2. How would you improve the moral of the society?
    By hiring moral, strong-willed, unflinchingly dedicated and honest teachers that can mend their students' minds into minds of good citizens.

    3. Can you justify somebody's bad behavior by thinking that he/she wasn't taught how to do so?
    It depends and also, only partially. I don't believe people only do what they are taught. This explanation may fly in the case of some 12 years old thief but not adults. But it doesn't mean that a person shouldn't have a second chance. I am all for second chances. But I am much more willing them when a person honestly admits that it wasn't just bad people around them but their own decisions too.

    4. Give us your understanding of love. Can you love and punish at the same time?
    Hmm, it is difficult to say. Love by my definition is having strong faith in some person and desire to see them grow, being their friend in all the obstacles. I feel like there is a place for some harshness in love when you see the person you love becoming someone worse but I feel like this approach should be tailored to people according to their personalities. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. In my opinion only 1% of love is something universal while the majority of it is born from your unique bond with a person which is special in every case. That's why these "Love advice" things never work - the only thing you have to learn is your partner's way of thinking and the only thing you have to see is themselves without any prejudice.

    5.Have you heard about the Southern hospitality? Everything is for the guest. There is also a German hospitality – the master of the house is always right. What method is the right one? Try to evaluate without the weight of any cultural aspects, traditions, nations etc.
    I prefer Dracula style hospitality - stay away from my den if you value your life and sanity. :)

    6. What is sympathy? When do you need to express it? When is it advised not to?
    Sympathy can be misplaced but it is never wrong per see because sympathy as an exercise in compassion is good for you. But you have to differentiate between someone just having sympathy for someone immoral, for the lost humanity in them and true blue fanatical obsession with someone's evil deeds and fanboyism.

    7.Are there any norms of behavior in the society? Do you follow them? Do people always have to follow them? Why?
    All societies have their own standards and while in my country I am often considered strange, I know places where my behavior is perfectly acceptable. It is all relative. It is not that I don't have the desire to follow the norms it's just I often simply don't understand them or those norms are objectively repressive. I was the most obedient child in my class so I am not rebellious or aggressive. I always feel like being casually polite and quiet is enough but I am often surprised when people expect much more. I mean, it was enough for my school and University so what's wrong? I really do feel like that people who demand others to go above and beyond in terms of etiquette - to always bring gifts to your hosts, always remember dates, etc, demand way too much. I have high standards for basic human decency and I care less about behavior than about values and people usually are all about looking pleasant and friendly rather than being moral. It baffles me. In some ways, too much etiquette even makes everyone act the same and I firmly believe in individuality. It is not necessary to be pleasant to be good.

    8. How do you know what attitude among people is right or wrong?
    What do you mean "how do you know?" It is fairly obvious - everything that harms or humiliates others is wrong
    Anything that doesn't is not wrong. Everything that destroys what others create is wrong. And creating something for the world, contributing to its evolution is always right. There are nuances to that, of course but I don't think I am ever in doubt whether what I see is right or wrong. Others disagree with me because they value traditional behavior over truly moral behavior. For example, boys who play with dolls are scorned even though it is harmless but boys humiliating each other down to sexual harassment is accepted by society because "boys will be boys", even though no real boys benefit from such treatment.

    9. What does moral mean? What is immoral? Does your understanding correlate with the others? How can you evaluate the correctness of your own understanding?
    Everything that is done with wellbeing of people and the world in mind is moral. Of course, the ideas of morality may differ but everything that is done with truly good intent is moral. I think we shouldn't call someone out just because their well-meaning actions yielded no result. While you can sometimes gauge the level of importance of something to a person by the results sometimes it is more difficult than that. Deciphering intent and determining whether it is real or fake is the most important thing question of morality, in my opinion. Basically, determining the truth. I think most people are more result-oriented. They will rather be with a horrible person who flatters them everyday than a good person who forgot their anniversary once. Also I feel like some people forget that destruction is always wrong. There is no excuse for it and saying it was done for moral reason is just thinly veiled barbarianism.

    10. Somebody is giving you a negative attitude – what is your reaction? Could you show your own negative attitude toward someone else? If so, how? Could you give a person the silent treatment? How easily do you forgive people?
    I am prone to getting quite angry with people but I have yet to see an instance where it would yield at least some results. Just like I am often unaffected by society, people are often unaffected by my anger too. I wish I could meet someone one day who would be affected by my anger and who would truly care about what I say when I am angry, remembering my words, analyzing them and correcting their behavior. Or at least giving me the reason why they think they are right, a rational reason I can understand. I am definitely capable of everything I accuse others of, even the despicable things I described above. My anger varies but I always become frustrated and very irrational. Nonetheless, I'd still prefer to be listened to even in this case. I sometimes give silent treatment but I actually hate all of it - the conflict itself and everything about it. Not because I don't like defending myself but just because it's stressful, time consuming and pointless. I believe anything can be solved logically and peacefully. A conversation can even get heated without turning into an argument. I wish me and others would learn how to debate our points like civilized people. I feel like you don't have to be a saint not to stoop to screaming.

    Block VI

    1."Whole world does not cost one tear of child" – how do you understand this phrase? Do you agree with this opinion?
    In the same time yes, the suffering of one person is enormous and can be as intense as suffering as many. But the statement is also about the fact that if you give up your basic humanity in search of the greater good, said greater good won't come. Can you sacrifice someone for the sake of many? Probably. But the world won't become better for it. If you can't afford to save everyone (this includes bad people, by the way, not just children and the like) then you are not quite there yet. Then the world you build is not truly moral. Then it's pragmatic. Maybe it's even a good kind of world but the very fact you gave up your humanity by sacrificing someone, the very fact you didn't provide conditions for peace for all...this kind of peace is not really a peace. I think you can achieve survival of everyone and it's not an Utopia. In fact, it is just demands tonnes of work and shifting focus to education and diplomacy instead of wars, rebellions and corporate business. It is not impossible, but difficult and not very pleasant for those who are rich and are used to using people.

    2. Is it acceptable to express emotions? Give examples of inappropriate expression of emotions.
    Not only acceptable, but natural and necessary for everyone. There are no inappropriate expressions of emotions, just inappropriate attitudes towards others. And of course we all have our personal likes and dislikes.
    Personally, I dislike loud people but I'd hesitate calling loud expression of emotions inappropriate. It is just alien to me, not necessarily bad. It also has to do with culture. People feel best hanging out with those who belong to their culture and it is natural to them to misunderstand emotions of people from other cultures.

    3. Can you use negative emotions? In what situations?
    I think you are free to give your most frank opinion of everything without fear, as long as it is not insulting to anyone. Of course, insulting is relative here but most people know what is acceptable and what is not.

    4. How do you express negative emotions? What does it look like? What do others think about it?
    It is different in any particular case. I don't think I have a to-go reaction to anything.

    5. Shallow emotions – what does it mean? Are there any other emotions?
    Shallow emotions aren't really emotions but some kind of subtle manipulations that come from the place of logic, firmly. The idea that all emotions are shallow is baffling.

    6. What are right or wrong emotions?
    There are only emotions that are true - the kind you really feel and not tell yourself you feel and fake ones that aren't emotions but delusions. There are no wrong and right emotions. Only wrong attitudes, I repeat. You have a right to feel lust. You don't have a right to feel entitled to someone's body and rape them.

    7. Can you change the emotional state of yourself? Of others? To what side – positive or negative?
    Definitely. There is such thing as self control. People who flaunt their lack of emotions often demonstrate lack of self control when their suppressed emotions show themselves. That's why suppression that is so glamorised especially amongst NT types here has nothing to do with self control. Knowing your emotions is a start of self control. Also, everyone suppresses some emotions, even otherwise emotional people. I don't know if I can influence emotions of others, I don't remember any instances of this happening.

    8. What does it mean to "pour out your emotions"? How does it happen?
    Personally, I don't know what it means. I don't pour anything, my emotions are more even and reserved. That's why I don't understand if I am a feeler or a thinker - thinkers are just too robotic and feelers love melodramatic things too much. I am aware that I am leaning to melodrama probably, but not to extent of people I know. I do have feelings that I dislike yet I usually understand my feelings pretty well and I am a bit more self aware than others in certain ways.

    9. Does your internal emotional state correlate with what you show externally?
    It is difficult to say. For me, my own emotions are obvious but people constantly misread my emotions, in fact, I’d say I’ve yet to see someone correctly reading my emotions. I hope I will find people who will be capable to understand me even though I may be not very expressive physically.

    10.Do you track what mood you are in throughout the day? Do you notice the mood of others?
    What do you mean by track?… Are there really people who are so unsure of what they feel they have to mentally note and analyze it daily? I think emotions are rather obvious. I notice the general mood of others but frankly, I don’t always understand internal emotions of others because I feel like their values or goals are different.

    Block VII

    1.Do you like surprises?
    No, I hate them. I want routine. I like variety and experiments in my work but otherwise, no surprises please.

    2. How people change? How do you feel about those changes? Can others see the changes?
    Change is inevitable and we not always adjust quickly to it. One example is when you are still in love with the image of someone that they are used to be but aren't now, not anymore. It happens to many people but I think it's not true love in this case. If you are attentive to your partner, you may see the seeds of other selves within them because every person carries multiple personalities within them and you will be able to determine whether you want to face them one day or they are unacceptable to you. No one is one dimensional like a cartoon character. I wish I could find someone whose changes I'd like and who would like my changes.

    3. Is it true that whatever happens is only for the best?
    I don't really know. You have to accept the changes when they happen but you should also analyze them carefully and determine whether they are right for you.

    4. What do you think of horoscopes, fortune telling etc.? Do you believe in luck, lucky fortuity?
    It is difficult to say but I can only say that I hate the idea that a person doesn't rule over their own fate. Astrology is not bad in the regard that it just shows (in theory) or claims to show natural inclinations of people, not necessarily something set in stone.

    5. Can you forecast events? Is it even real?
    I don't believe that you can forecast events but I believe that you can estimate the outcome logically in snap second using many factors at once which I often do and which is easy for me. Nothing mystical about it though. And I'll be frank - while spirituality is a nice concept in my opinion, mysticism is not.

    6. What is time? How do you feel time? Can you "kill" time? How?
    In my opinion, the time should be regarded much more liberally than it is. It is relative. It is a human made concept. Even the word "time travel" makes me laugh. Do you guys understand that time is something humans invented to describe the cycle of the planets? That there are no numbers in nature? How can you turn that back? All machinations that people do to "time" is simply tinkering with the concept of the clock, not time itself. There is only matter, but time is invented by humans. Not the most easily understood concept for me.

    7. Is it easy for you to wait for some important event? What if you don’t know when it is supposed to happen?
    No, not easy at all. I get so nervous I hardly sleep, I may lose appetite. Sometimes, when I know it is even harder to wait. And sometimes unknowing is worse. It is hard to pick. Either way, waiting is very difficult for me.

    8. Do you need help creating forecasts and determining how something will end? Do you trust those forecasts?
    No, I am good at guessing the way things will unfold. It is not really guessing though but as I said before, logic. It is not difficult for me to see how most historical events will end, for example.

    9.Are you normally late? How do you react if someone is late?
    Normally I am not late, at least not horribly because I am too anxious to be late. But I am not mad at people being late, even if they are very late, I just assume something important enough is going on in their lives.

    10.Imagine the situation where you agreed to meet with someone. Your feelings and actions: a) 20 minutes before the meeting starts, b) 5 minutes before the meeting starts, c) it is time for the meeting to start, but the person is not here, d) 20 minutes after the meeting start time and the person is not here, e) more time and the person is still not here…
    I mean, waiting is not fun but I don't instantly assume a person makes me wait out of some malicious intent, which would be funny but most punctual people I know are those kind of paranoid to really think late people do this just to make them suffer not because of more realistic reasons.

    Block VIII

    1.Is there a meaning of life? In what? Is it the same for everybody?
    It is different for everyone but largely, evolving as humans and reaching our utmost potential as human civilization. We need to be kind to each other to reach that utmost potential.

    2.What should be done so people can be happy?
    One measure won't fit all,especially in the world we live right now. People lack the most important prerequisite for happiness - meaning. Since most people lead meaningless lives, who knows what temporarily satisfies those fleeting urges.

    3. In the situations with a lot of potential and volatility will you trust your own guts, logically calculating everything or will you ask people you trust what should be done?
    While I usually like to solve things myself, if something is truly difficult, I won't hesitate asking for help but I will only help if I feel like a person knows enough to help and I have something to learn from them. This learning is not very fun but it can be fun sometimes if a person is not very arrogant about their knowledge or solutions but professional and friendly and feels like my input is valuable.

    4. When you meet a stranger, what can you say about them right away? How do you know what this person is all about? Does it take long to understand someone's talents?
    I constantly repeat "don't judge a book by its cover" and yet I am myself a worst offender because it takes a couple of minutes for me to read a person and make a judgement about them. And this judgement, strangely, is almost always right. People have been telling me I am detective-level observant and it's true. I notice many details in those around me for some reason and I naturally absorb such information from the environment even when I am relaxed. One guy whose interests and tastes have been correctly guessed by me exclaimed that it's something almost mystical. Actually, this comes firmly from the place of logic, experience and I'd say instinct.

    5. Remember an interesting person and call out 5-6 qualities you think are interesting in them. What makes an interesting person? Are you an interesting person? Why? What if someone calls you "boring" and "not interesting"?
    I'd argue against calling anyone interesting in all honesty though. Even people I truly admire. This word is vague and dangerous because of it, it implies the value that may not exist. Being interesting means looking like you have something to offer but it's not always the case. I don't know my idols enough to confidently say that they are interesting because they may be very different on the inside. And the word "interesting" is just isn't something I'd use for someone I know well. If someone would call me boring I'd laugh and wear the label with pride. I can be many things but someone as strange as me can't be boring.

    6. What opinions, from people who know you, seem: a) fair; b) not fair; c) hurtful; d) strange.
    People constantly misjudge me, first I was offended but now I am so tired of correcting them (and being accused of incapability of "looking at myself from outside point of view") that I literally don't believe anyone can understand me. As I type this and reread what I wrote, I feel more and more like this doesn't show the real me, it all sounds sappy and very far from real me despite my honest efforts at being truthful. Guess I am just incapable of showing who I really am and I am fated to be called a sap, overemotional woman or someone else that has nothing to do with me. I am literally afraid of being typed as a feeler when I remember people comparing Infps to rainbow unicorns or fluffy bunnies or articles about Infjs only having photos of vague boho women. It is not only not fair to said types but also confuses me because I don't want nothing to do with it.

    Okay, back to the topic at hand.
    Fair opinions - that I am egotistic (true), lazy (true), self indulgent (true), pretty smart ( true).
    Not fair - that I feel extremely sorry for myself (I get very depressed because of some serious questions life poses before me but I don't feel like I act too whiny. I’m also upbeat most of the time and fairly emotionally dynamic. So it is bullshit.), that I am overemotional (I am not. I am emotional but never overly so. I, a potential feeler met an INTP girl not long time ago who is so emotional it makes my head spin. Yet nobody questions her typing and I am always being questioned).
    Strange - that I am greedy (um, what?..I am literally a slacker...okay, maybe sometimes and only in childish things..it's not really greed), that I am shallow and mostly interested in shallow things ( excuse me...but if there was some kind of contest of the depth of emotion...Not their strength but exactly depth...I feel like I'd win for sure.)

    7. Do you fantasize? What kind of fantasies do you have?
    I just think about the plot of my stories and imagine my life the way I want it to be. I also sometimes imagine myself living someone else's life but not because I want to live their life, just because I wonder how it is and whether the knowledge of their life from the inside can help me in life somehow.
    I am very imaginative in fiction but I tend to daydream about very earthy things.

    8. What qualities should a person have to be successful and why?
    See my description of what constitutes a strong person above.

    9. What qualities can stop a person from being successful and why?
    Opposite of what constitutes a strong person.

    10. What is more important in life – to be a good person or be a successful one? Why? Is a good person always successful? If not, then why?
    Is that even a question? What's the point in being successful without being good? Just to eat your money until you burst? Evil is shortsighted. It leaves nothing after itself but trash. Sometimes even worse, like broken people and wastelands, sometimes even corpses. Putting things into perspective, there is no dichotomy between good and evil, just between the future and lack of it. Those who leave trash after themselves work for the lack of the future. I repeat, you don't have to be some kinda Protestant all loving mother hen angel to be a good person. You have no choice but to be good if you literally want the world to exist. All bad actions lead to nonexistence so if you fear nonexistence at least a bit, being truly evil is bad for you. So being good is preferable to all the things, including success. Success is also relative, as I constantly repeat. Being kind is a success in itself. And this kindness means different things for different people. You can be a cynical bastard who drinks and smokes and speaks only in profanities and still be a good person.

  3. #3

    You were really interesting to type, and I have a reasonable idea of your type, I actually think you're a logical type rather than ethical, and potentially the same as me. I would still recommend to get a professional typing since my knowledge is more theoretical and I'm not that confident in my ability to type specific individuals.

    I'm using WSS terms here so. S - Si, F - Se, T - Ni, I - Ne, R - Fi, E - Fe, L - Ti, P - Te

    I don't know what you are talking about here. I just don't use this line of thinking at all. People are always both strangers and friends to you, depending on what part of their personality takes over. However, I know for sure that people who revel in destruction and suffering of others will never be close to me. It doesn't mean I like only nice people, I am fairly generous with mistakes people commit but there is a line there that I hope most people won't cross. But I guess I also will never become close with someone who doesn't speak the same emotional language as me. And that's why I don't have many friends.
    R seems weak and unvalued, you were unable to distinguish when someone goes from being a stranger to a friend, and you said that you didn't even think that way at all, you describe preferring people who speak the same emotional language so E over R, so alpha NT or beta ST makes the most sense here.

    Not consistent. I am basically many people in one handy package.I am a disoriented squad held together by sappy values you will read about below!
    Makes some sense for ILE or SLE with creative L where it gets turned on and off, this could seem a bit inconsistent.

    In my opinion, the time should be regarded much more liberally than it is. It is relative. It is a human made concept. Even the word "time travel" makes me laugh. Do you guys understand that time is something humans invented to describe the cycle of the planets? That there are no numbers in nature? How can you turn that back? All machinations that people do to "time" is simply tinkering with the concept of the clock, not time itself. There is only matter, but time is invented by humans. Not the most easily understood concept for me.
    The relativism here further supports my assertion of L and E over P and R. Pretty sure you're an L ego type also, your answers seem concise and attempting to provide clear definitions.


    Depends on the kind of work. If it was just normal work I'd be happy to wing it and relax. But if it's something important to me, I'd chastise myself for being unable to finish. Sometimes I'd even cry. However, I'd get over it pretty quickly too. I prefer starting anew, with new understanding of things.
    I over T seems likely here, maybe more likely for an irrational type like ILE than LII. Although I'm also pretty bad at finishing things.

    No, I am good at guessing the way things will unfold. It is not really guessing though but as I said before, logic. It is not difficult for me to see how most historical events will end, for example.
    T here is an area of confidence, so ego or id.

    It is difficult to say. For me, my own emotions are obvious but people constantly misread my emotions, in fact, I’d say I’ve yet to see someone correctly reading my emotions. I hope I will find people who will be capable to understand me even though I may be not very expressive physically.
    Weak but valued E, I'm pretty much the same.

    I desire comfort strongly but I am not sure I am capable of creating it. I may obsess over aesthetics but I am actually a messy person who hates cleaning. However, it depends what you mean by comfort?
    Oh this is important, clearly S valued and weak, in the superid.


    constantly repeat "don't judge a book by its cover" and yet I am myself a worst offender because it takes a couple of minutes for me to read a person and make a judgement about them. And this judgement, strangely, is almost always right. People have been telling me I am detective-level observant and it's true. I notice many details in those around me for some reason and I naturally absorb such information from the environment even when I am relaxed. One guy whose interests and tastes have been correctly guessed by me exclaimed that it's something almost mystical. Actually, this comes firmly from the place of logic, experience and I'd say instinct.
    Interesting, seemingly R but seems maybe more L or P since it's about observing details about the environment and arriving at a conclusion through deduction.

    I just think about the plot of my stories and imagine my life the way I want it to be. I also sometimes imagine myself living someone else's life but not because I want to live their life, just because I wonder how it is and whether the knowledge of their life from the inside can help me in life somehow.
    I am very imaginative in fiction but I tend to daydream about very earthy things.
    T is strong, and maybe demonstrative. Also P with the pragmatic approach to daydreaming.

    5. Do you think it's ok to occupy someone else's territory? In what situations?
    Never.
    Yeah F is clearly not valued and is weak.

    No, I hate them. I want routine. I like variety and experiments in my work but otherwise, no surprises please.
    Rational temperament seems more likely here. Ij over Ep

    It is difficult to say but I can only say that I hate the idea that a person doesn't rule over their own fate. Astrology is not bad in the regard that it just shows (in theory) or claims to show natural inclinations of people, not necessarily something set in stone.
    I valued over T, pretty sure of that along with the S valuing.

    There are only emotions that are true - the kind you really feel and not tell yourself you feel and fake ones that aren't emotions but delusions. There are no wrong and right emotions. Only wrong attitudes, I repeat. You have a right to feel lust. You don't have a right to feel entitled to someone's body and rape them.
    Again F devaluing, and it at first seemed like R might be present, but it's clear there's much more emphasis on E and E as being valued and mobilizing. You desire to feel the right kind of emotions, and are less concerned with relating to people through setting a certain interpersonal distance, but rather emotionally relating to them.

    Hmm, it is difficult to say. Love by my definition is having strong faith in some person and desire to see them grow, being their friend in all the obstacles. I feel like there is a place for some harshness in love when you see the person you love becoming someone worse but I feel like this approach should be tailored to people according to their personalities. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. In my opinion only 1% of love is something universal while the majority of it is born from your unique bond with a person which is special in every case. That's why these "Love advice" things never work - the only thing you have to learn is your partner's way of thinking and the only thing you have to see is themselves without any prejudice.
    Arguably the only piece of evidence I've seen of R being present, and seems very delta. But I think it's more about understanding their point of view and arguing against it, or agreeing rather than a real personal bond with a specific interpersonal distance. I+L rather than R.

    Yeah I'm pretty sure alpha NT, ILE seems more likely since F seems present but weak and not valued in the slightest. L is definitely present, and pretty strong, you seem to easily be able to describe and define your understanding of things, and don't seem confused with your worldview. You seem to enjoy trying new things out and the idea of reaching an optimal human potential seems very I valued and strong I with P maybe demonstrative. Strong valuing of S but an inability to produce it yourself, R seems not really present at all. Not once did you mention the idea of interpersonal distance, and when relationships were mentioned they were always in an emotional context. The few times I did see evidence of R it always seemed like it was something else, usually L, P, and I, like you were using those to make up for your lack of R. Your inconsistency in behavior might be because of a creative L which is turned off usually but only used when needed in context. F seems to be more present than R. Some things may indicate rational over irrational, but I'm kinda doubtful of that dichotomy being meaningful enough, and especially with enneagram or other personality aspects/life experiences may cloud the distinction. I think ILE, maybe LII but more unlikely.

    How comfortable are you being assertive, taking action in the moment?
    Last edited by horseloverfat; 11-16-2019 at 04:23 PM.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4

    Quote Originally Posted by horseloverfat View Post
    You were really interesting to type, and I have a reasonable idea of your type, I actually think you're a logical type rather than ethical, and potentially the same as me. I would still recommend to get a professional typing since my knowledge is more theoretical and I'm not that confident in my ability to type specific individuals.

    I'm using WSS terms here so. S - Si, F - Se, T - Ni, I - Ne, R - Fi, E - Fe, L - Ti, P - Te


    R seems weak and unvalued, you were unable to distinguish when someone goes from being a stranger to a friend, and you said that you didn't even think that way at all, you describe preferring people who speak the same emotional language so E over R, so alpha NT or beta ST makes the most sense here.


    Makes some sense for ILE or SLE with creative L where it gets turned on and off, this could seem a bit inconsistent.


    The relativism here further supports my assertion of L and E over P and R. Pretty sure you're an L ego type also, your answers seem concise and attempting to provide clear definitions.



    I over T seems likely here, maybe more likely for an irrational type like ILE than LII. Although I'm also pretty bad at finishing things.



    T here is an area of confidence, so ego or id.


    Weak but valued E, I'm pretty much the same.


    Oh this is important, clearly S valued and weak, in the superid.



    Interesting, seemingly R but seems maybe more L or P since it's about observing details about the environment and arriving at a conclusion through deduction.


    T is strong, and maybe demonstrative. Also P with the pragmatic approach to daydreaming.


    Yeah F is clearly not valued and is weak.


    Rational temperament seems more likely here. Ij over Ep


    I valued over T, pretty sure of that along with the S valuing.


    Again F devaluing, and it at first seemed like R might be present, but it's clear there's much more emphasis on E and E as being valued and mobilizing. You desire to feel the right kind of emotions, and are less concerned with relating to people through setting a certain interpersonal distance, but rather emotionally relating to them.



    Arguably the only piece of evidence I've seen of R being present, and seems very delta. But I think it's more about understanding their point of view and arguing against it, or agreeing rather than a real personal bond with a specific interpersonal distance. I+L rather than R.

    Yeah I'm pretty sure alpha NT, ILE seems more likely since F seems present but weak and not valued in the slightest. L is definitely present, and pretty strong, you seem to easily be able to describe and define your understanding of things, and don't seem confused with your worldview. You seem to enjoy trying new things out and the idea of reaching an optimal human potential seems very I valued and strong I with P maybe demonstrative. Strong valuing of S but an inability to produce it yourself, R seems not really present at all. Not once did you mention the idea of interpersonal distance, and when relationships were mentioned they were always in an emotional context. The few times I did see evidence of R it always seemed like it was something else, usually L, P, and I, like you were using those to make up for your lack of R. Your inconsistency in behavior might be because of a creative L which is turned off usually but only used when needed in context. F seems to be more present than R. Some things may indicate rational over irrational, but I'm kinda doubtful of that dichotomy being meaningful enough, and especially with enneagram or other personality aspects/life experiences may cloud the distinction. I think ILE, maybe LII but more unlikely.

    How comfortable are you being assertive, taking action in the moment?
    Bad, very bad. I failed my PE education because I couldn't react to physical commands quickly enough. On the other hand, I have a generally quick reaction to natural, unstructured stimuli/ good reflexes. And mentally, I am even quicker. Thank you for calling my questionnaire interesting. Maybe being interesting is not the point of typing but I've always observed myself as a curious kind of person. I can't believe that I am not being typed as feeler, though. People usually call me a bit emotionally unhinged. :) Also, that pull towards beauty and ugliness combined...Wouldn't LII care less about that? Also, LIIs are described as people who understand time very well and I frankly confess that the very concept of time is not known to me. Also, I am not meticulous, I am just...a creature of habit I guess. I am not criticizing, by the way, I am just trying to look at myself objectively.

  6. #5

    ILE makes the most sense although I considered IEE because you said some things that could be R. But E valuing and the presence of L are pretty explicit so I doubt it. I don't really think LII at all now, F is present, you have some ability to act in the moment, like with unstructured stimuli. But it's not something you're really adept at, and would prefer not to. I hated PE, and usually I would just hide from the coach and try to wait it out.

    You say you don't understand time, but I'm not talking about knowing when the pizza guy is coming , but rather the flow of events and which events are significant to the end goal. You're pretty good at T, but it seems to be something which you devalue considerably, in fact you attribute some of the stuff that relates to T to logic instead, like L or P. It seems to me to be in an ignoring position, something which you turn off frequently and prefer not to use in favor of the leading I, to keep exploring and not set anything in stone.

    I'm more willing to use T but it's more subconscious. I can create elaborate storylines from a set of initial conditions, and see where it will end up. Also I tend toward teleology in my thought process, but I don't believe in something as fated and destined necessarily, rather trends towards an attractor. An LII if they're more intuitive, or because of enneagram, life experiences, etc. can even be mistaken for an irrational type like IEI because of demonstrative T and IEIs mobilizing L. However an IEI would have difficulty defining clear concepts, and would often be vague on definitions until they develop L, mistaken for ILI is possible but ILI would be more critical, and won't respond well to emotions. Also it's always for the purpose of L, understanding, not for T.

    Yeah logical types can be very emotional, like your INTP friend you mentioned, especially if they value E. The "robotic" types tend to be E devaluing and in ignoring or vulnerable, like with ILI and SLI, or EII and ESI. There's an explicit rejection of E in favor of R, if you look at the ESI vs ILE filatova pictures, the ILEs look much more emotionally upfront.

    E suggestive types have difficulty controlling emotions, and they can be suppressed until they are released, usually not in a nice way. I get sad often and I need someone who's better at utilizing emotions to cheer me up, since I can't really change them myself. They also prefer more emotional people who can help project their emotional state onto others. I tend to like girls who are more emotional and I can read their emotions easily. People who are difficult to read and are standoffish scare me off a bit, which is a bit hypocritical since I can act like that sometimes.

    ILEs can be a bit emotional, actually since it's mobilizing they can get mistaken along the benefit cycle for an EIE. If you've ever seen Star Trek TNG, Q is someone who I would type ILE. But he can come off as willing to upset people and play with their emotions, which might seem like an EIE, but it's clearly for I rather than E. They have better emotional control than an LII though. Neil degrasse tyson was also typed as ILE by WSS, and it makes some sense. Tends to be obsessed with how people perceive him, wants to give off a good impression, but sometimes looks like an a-hole, can be a little too egocentric.

    Also the S suggestive was there, the desire for slowing down and enjoying the comforts around. But inability to produce it yourself.


    LIIs unlike ILEs can become obsessed with their theories, like they're uniquely special or something, even a bit arrogant in thinking they've found the path to ultimate truth.

    I mean I care about beauty but more in a geometric, and musical sense, but ugliness I'm not sure, for me beauty is in the complexity of the structures that are explored. I can spend hours customizing my desktop, or looking for cool fractal wallpapers. I become a bit obsessed by fractal shapes, seeing a divinity in them, I'm even working on a side project for exploring fractal and self similar objects. You seemed dismissive of symmetry and didn't see that as the point. So I think I over L makes sense, L seems valued but the idea of L for the sake of L is crazy. Especially L+T which you didn't seem to think was important, but rather you seemed more interested in I+P although the P was more subtle. This guy clif pickover is obviously LII, the emphasis on L for the sake of L, sometimes becoming obsessed with their theories about how things are, to a "religious" extent. Another LII is david bohm, who's known for pilot wave theory but also implicate-explicit and holographic models of the universe. Supposedly Tolkien is LII, and that may make sense since he spent 30+ years world building rather than actually writing the story.

    No, it's fine, I enjoy when people debate me on this sort of stuff. Whats your mbti self typing?
    Last edited by horseloverfat; 11-17-2019 at 10:26 AM.

  7. #6

    Quote Originally Posted by horseloverfat View Post
    ILE makes the most sense although I considered IEE because you said some things that could be R. But E valuing and the presence of L are pretty explicit so I doubt it. I don't really think LII at all now, F is present, you have some ability to act in the moment, like with unstructured stimuli. But it's not something you're really adept at, and would prefer not to. I hated PE, and usually I would just hide from the coach and try to wait it out.

    You say you don't understand time, but I'm not talking about knowing when the pizza guy is coming , but rather the flow of events and which events are significant to the end goal. You're pretty good at T, but it seems to be something which you devalue considerably, in fact you attribute some of the stuff that relates to T to logic instead, like L or P. It seems to me to be in an ignoring position, something which you turn off frequently and prefer not to use in favor of the leading I, to keep exploring and not set anything in stone.

    I'm more willing to use T but it's more subconscious. I can create elaborate storylines from a set of initial conditions, and see where it will end up. Also I tend toward teleology in my thought process, but I don't believe in something as fated and destined necessarily, rather trends towards an attractor. An LII if they're more intuitive, or because of enneagram, life experiences, etc. can even be mistaken for an irrational type like IEI because of demonstrative T and IEIs mobilizing L. However an IEI would have difficulty defining clear concepts, and would often be vague on definitions until they develop L, mistaken for ILI is possible but ILI would be more critical, and won't respond well to emotions. Also it's always for the purpose of L, understanding, not for T.

    Yeah logical types can be very emotional, like your INTP friend you mentioned, especially if they value E. The "robotic" types tend to be E devaluing and in ignoring or vulnerable, like with ILI and SLI, or EII and ESI. There's an explicit rejection of E in favor of R, if you look at the ESI vs ILE filatova pictures, the ILEs look much more emotionally upfront.

    E suggestive types have difficulty controlling emotions, and they can be suppressed until they are released, usually not in a nice way. I get sad often and I need someone who's better at utilizing emotions to cheer me up, since I can't really change them myself. They also prefer more emotional people who can help project their emotional state onto others. I tend to like girls who are more emotional and I can read their emotions easily. People who are difficult to read and are standoffish scare me off a bit, which is a bit hypocritical since I can act like that sometimes.

    ILEs can be a bit emotional, actually since it's mobilizing they can get mistaken along the benefit cycle for an EIE. If you've ever seen Star Trek TNG, Q is someone who I would type ILE. But he can come off as willing to upset people and play with their emotions, which might seem like an EIE, but it's clearly for I rather than E. They have better emotional control than an LII though. Neil degrasse tyson was also typed as ILE by WSS, and it makes some sense. Tends to be obsessed with how people perceive him, wants to give off a good impression, but sometimes looks like an a-hole, can be a little too egocentric.

    LIIs unlike ILEs can become obsessed with their theories, like they're uniquely special or something, even a bit arrogant in thinking they've found the path to ultimate truth.

    I mean I care about beauty but more in a geometric, and musical sense, but ugliness I'm not sure, for me beauty is in the complexity of the structures that are explored. I can spend hours customizing my desktop, or looking for cool fractal wallpapers. I become a bit obsessed by fractal shapes, seeing a divinity in them, I'm even working on a side project for exploring fractal and self similar objects. You seemed dismissive of symmetry and didn't see that as the point. So I think I over L makes sense, L seems valued but the idea of L for the sake of L is crazy. Especially L+T which you didn't seem to think was important, but rather you seemed more interested in I+P although the P was more subtle. This guy clif pickover is obviously LII, the emphasis on L for the sake of L, sometimes becoming obsessed with their theories about how things are, to a "religious" extent. Another LII is david bohm, who's known for pilot wave theory but also implicate-explicit and holographic models of the universe. Supposedly Tolkien is LII, and that may make sense since he spent 30+ years world building rather than actually writing the story.

    No, it's fine, I enjoy when people debate me on this sort of stuff.
    What you said is incredible and actually pretty enlightening but I still feel like some piece of a puzzle is missing. :) I am especially interested in how you said that LIIs are obsessed with seeking the "ultimate truth". And remember how I emphasized in my questionnaire many times the relativity of everything and the lack of anything ultimate - power, truth, beauty, etc... Yeah, I know you say LIE for me now but still, I frankly think those types are still similar enough in seeking the absolute and the logical. So, being frank - I AM logical. I am fairly sure I am. But I DON'T SEEK the logic. Logic is not my goal. Neither logical solutions nor explanations. And even not the truth. (A bit shocking, because Thinkers often seek Justice and Feelers seek the Truth, aren't they?) So, what do I seek? I'd say experience. Geniune, and also understandable kind of experience but experience, not the solution. Actually finding solutions may be fun at times and necessary for life but it is neither my forte nor what I strive for. I seek what is important, what is of value and that's what pushes me to think I am a feeler. (A bad name for a group, by the way. Valuer would be more correct. :) To me the world often needs to be just and pragmatic but I don't see value in explaining everything about it. I am not all for mysticism but all for mystique. The fully rational world would be boring to me.

    By the way, I am also that kid trying to hide from the PE coach! I was also bullied horribly in that class so it obviously influenced the way I react to it. But what's strange is that while I was very clumsy in school and constantly mocked, in my free time I could move normally. Still, indoor gyms horrify me, I prefer the nature and it's easy for me to move in the nature and be one with it, without thinking (again, shocking for an intutitive?) I know that I probably shouldn't assume things, but aren't most LIEs the kind pf people who could care less about nature, simply as intuitives, even if they are not as bad as LIIs at acting in the moment?

    You seem to claim that I understand time pretty well but I still disagree. I am that person who sees nothing wrong in being late and others being late. I am that person who can't plan anything ahead (I still think that the questionnaire was a bit too heavy on theory and ethics and not heavy enough on lifestyle), I think I should mention it here. I am the person who is constantly surprised by what time it is. I am the person who can't feel how much time I spend on literally everything. I remember people telling me that I don't value time as early as first school years, it was one of the most common critiques for me as an otherwise fairly obedient kid/student. Sorry for this being long, but I feel like I need to do another, less theoretical questionnaire here. :) Because while I look logical here, the questionnaire fails to address my love of doing nothing, liberal use of time, vagueness, dislike of any concrete plans and the fact that mindless exploration is the best pastime for me. Your points are noted though and I will be looking forward to them once I will another questionnaire.

  8. #7

    Yeah I don't think LII for you, you're more interested in exploration than finding truth. I just want understanding, in everything I do, I don't feel at ease until I understand it, and that's for my life, the universe, and everything around me.

    I said ILE not LIE, definitely not LIE, there may be a chance of IEE but I didn't see much of R, you weren't really aware of how you develop friendships and it seemed mostly unvalued. Everything you said is indicative of (I) ego, and (I) leading. Enjoying exploration, an ILE wouldn't have a focus, whatever catches their interest is what they explore and they drop it as soon as it becomes uninteresting.
    (P) is definitely there, most likely in a demonstrative position, you like to solve problems and capable but don't feel like it's the most important thing.
    What seems like feeling to you, looks more like (T) and (I) to me, the idea of finding what's important through exploration, but I doubt (T) is leading or demonstrative.

    ILE would put you in the same quadra, alpha as LII, SEI, and ESE.

    Right now my biggest problem for ILE is this
    Hmm, it is difficult to say. Love by my definition is having strong faith in some person and desire to see them grow, being their friend in all the obstacles. I feel like there is a place for some harshness in love when you see the person you love becoming someone worse but I feel like this approach should be tailored to people according to their personalities. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. In my opinion only 1% of love is something universal while the majority of it is born from your unique bond with a person which is special in every case. That's why these "Love advice" things never work - the only thing you have to learn is your partner's way of thinking and the only thing you have to see is themselves without any prejudice.
    Which indicates delta values and R as potentially valued, whereas for ILE it would be vulnerable, so they wouldn't care nor notice the bonds they have with people unless it was pointed out to them, and then having to maintain a friendship with a certain bond would cause stress. Also your difficulty with the theoretical aspects of this could be a problem with L. So while I think ILE is more likely, I can't entirely discount IEE.

    By time I don't mean lateness vs being on time, that probably has to do more with conscientiousness. But the ability to find what's important in a flow of events, to pick out the important ones, to close the number of possibilities to find the most meaningful and relevant. (T) is dynamic and introverted, so this form of information would be flowing, like a stream, but relating to the events that cover life. Like for example generating a storyline with characters and imagining how the story would evolve, or writing music which best invokes certain emotional states at the right moment (T+E).

    Also everything you described at the end perfectly fits (I) leading, so I'm pretty sure of that. ILE or IEE, both can be similar in that their main function is the same, but they value different judging elements. IEE prefers factual data and "what works", problem solving. ILE prefers complexity and structure.


    Yeah that's why I would recommend someone who can talk to you face to face, and professionally type you. World Socionics society does those for a small cost, and there's some others also. I don't think answering another questionnaire will help since you seem confused about describing yourself and someone who can ask follow up questions and lead it in an open ended way would be better, like an interview format.
    Last edited by horseloverfat; 11-17-2019 at 01:08 PM.

  9. #8
    Unknown

    record 10 min tale about yourself
    this will give nonverbal to type you

  10. #9

    Quote Originally Posted by horseloverfat View Post
    Yeah I don't think LII for you, you're more interested in exploration than finding truth. I just want understanding, in everything I do, I don't feel at ease until I understand it, and that's for my life, the universe, and everything around me.

    I said ILE not LIE, definitely not LIE, there may be a chance of IEE but I didn't see much of R, you weren't really aware of how you develop friendships and it seemed mostly unvalued. Everything you said is indicative of (I) ego, and (I) leading. Enjoying exploration, an ILE wouldn't have a focus, whatever catches their interest is what they explore and they drop it as soon as it becomes uninteresting.
    (P) is definitely there, most likely in a demonstrative position, you like to solve problems and capable but don't feel like it's the most important thing.
    What seems like feeling to you, looks more like (T) and (I) to me, the idea of finding what's important through exploration, but I doubt (T) is leading or demonstrative.


    Right now my biggest problem for ILE is this

    Which indicates delta values and R as potentially valued, whereas for ILE it would be vulnerable, so they wouldn't care nor notice the bonds they have with people unless it was pointed out to them, and then having to maintain a friendship with a certain bond would cause stress. Also your difficulty with the theoretical aspects of this could be a problem with L. So while I think ILE is more likely, I can't entirely discount IEE.

    By time I don't mean lateness vs being on time, that probably has to do more with conscientiousness. But the ability to find what's important in a flow of events, to pick out the important ones, to close the number of possibilities to find the most meaningful and relevant. (T) is dynamic and introverted, so this form of information would be flowing, like a stream, but relating to the events that cover life. Like for example generating a storyline with characters and imagining how the story would evolve, or writing music which best invokes certain emotional states at the right moment (T+E).

    Also everything you described at the end perfectly fits (I) leading, so I'm pretty sure of that. ILE or IEE, both can be similar in that their main function is the same, but they value different judging elements. IEE prefers factual data and "what works", problem solving. ILE prefers complexity and structure.


    Yeah that's why I would recommend someone who can talk to you face to face, and professionally type you. World Socionics society does those for a small cost, and there's some others also. I don't think answering another questionnaire will help since you seem confused about describing yourself and someone who can ask follow up questions and lead it in an open ended way would be better, like an interview format.
    Sorry for mixing things up, something must have distracted me. I still stand by my assertion that I am not confused, though. I think careful evaluation of real life traits comes before typing. It is wrong to look at everything from the point of view of quickly assumed type because some things can be attributed not to type but to other influences. Anyway...At least now I am confident in my MBTI type. I am pretty sure I am ISFP due to a lot of factors I won't mention here. Thank you anyway.

  11. #10

    You sound like an INTP.


     

Similar Threads

  1. [LII] 80 Answers to 80 Questions. Well, most of them.
    By Empty in forum What's my Socionics type?
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-27-2014, 07:47 AM
  2. 80 Answers to 80 Questions
    By Cellar Door in forum What's my Socionics type?
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-15-2014, 07:31 PM
  3. The 80's: I Loved the 80's BEFORE VH1
    By SuperunknownVortex in forum Trends Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-25-2010, 11:43 AM

Bookmarks

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 10:41 PM.
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