User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 49

  1. #21
    Senior Member _eric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/so
    Socionics
    ENFj
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeaT View Post
    The EIE-Ni subtype is going to be very introverted. Also, I don't look at behavior as much as I'd look at your cognition. In terms of dichotomies, I do think your cognition is negativist rather than positivist, and seeing your other posts I do think you got Ni in the ego block. So that leaves us with ILI and EIE.
    What do you mean by negativist vs. positivist?
    That's why you should study Model A, not read descriptions. Most descriptions of the types are terrible anyway.
    Ok, I'm not familiar with Model A. I have never even heard of it until you mentioned it.
    I would look into the basic metabolism of how the functions and their elements operate first before I would plunge too much into subtype. You need to understand the fundamentals of how socionics works before you can understand how subtype works.
    Yeah, I don't think I'm really familiar with the fundamentals. Most socionics sites I've seen don't explain that very well.
    Then what is your thinking preference? If you don't feel it's located in super-id block, what about ego block? I do think you are Fe-Ti over Ti-Fe.
    It's Ti for sure, and I agree with you thinking I am Fe-Ti. I don't know what the blocks mean though lol...socionics is confusing to me compared to MBTI.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    Interesting, because I have had a lot of people think I'm an N or one person even said he thought I should go ESI because I'm too Ni to be SEE.
    I can see an argument for that, but most of all, what you seem to express externally is a lot of Se and Te. An ESI-Fi type would express themselves more through Fi and Ni.

    So you think that my thinking and analysis are more due to Te than Ni?
    Definitely. You seem more inclined to cite facts and data or to simply make categorical distinctions than changing perspectives of things.

    EDIT: I'm reading ESI and it just reminds me so much of JTG, though he'd actually probably be the more withdrawn, pig-headed, internally exacting and mistrusting ESI-Fi.
    No idea who it is, although I wouldn't try to compare yourself too much to other people. That's how I ended up mistyping as an Fi dominant type for a couple of months because I started to become more aware of Fi within myself and this awareness made me over-identify with it as a function, so I thought I must be an Fi dominant type.

    If he's an ESI-Fi I would definitely be the ESI-Se. I don't think we had relations of Identity, though, we had Mirror relations. That's why the concept of ENFP and ISTJ made sense, too, like turning two people inside out and having them relate to each other, yet not quite understanding why the other person choosing to come from the ass end first.
    I am not sure the intertype system works that easily when we factor subtypes into the equation.

    SEE-Fi and ESI-Fi make more sense then.
    Still think ESI-Se makes the most sense.

    But please, explain to me why you think I fit that description, I'm open to hearing the possibility that I'm ESI-Se.
    Not so much the description but simply the way you choose to come across and interact with the world. Have you read the Meged and Ovcharov articles of how the inert and contact subtypes work in terms of metabolism flow? The tl;dr version is that for an ESI, ESI-Fi is inert, the energy flows towards introversion. You will thus as a whole see much more Fi and Ni from this person when engaging this person in communication, and the person will also appear much more reserved and less engaged with the external world.

    Then when compared the contact subtype which is ESI-Se, they will be more engaging because more energy flows towards Se and Te. Not only will they be more engaging with the external world than the inert subtype, but when engaging they will clearly do so through an Se Te lens. This is apparent with myself too, being a contact subtype, and I predominantly express myself through Te and Se respectively.

    Now, one way to discern mirror type from each other has to do with what function comes first in the ego block. This might seem obvious, SEE has base Se and creative Fi and ESI base Fi and creative Se, but when we toss in the subtypes this might not seem as obvious anymore. Not only is an SEE-Fi going to be much more introverted compared to the SEE-Se type, but an ESI-Se type is going to appear more extroverted at first glance than an ESI-Fi type.

    Therefore, we cannot judge these types only based on whether they seem introverted or extroverted or how energetic they are. There is a significant overlap caused by the subtypes. The way we discern these two types apart then is to look at the creative function. Why the creative and not the base? The answer is simple - in socionics, we engage with the world through the creative function. This means that for an SEE regardless if Se or Fi subtype, they will first engage with people utilizing Fi. They might for instance start a conversation with another person saying something like, "Hey, I saw this movie yesterday. This is what I thought about it. What about you? Have you seen it?" whereas an ESI would say, "I had such great food today, it tasted so great". Do you see the difference between seeking Fi evaluation and focusing on sensory stimuli?

    Of course, this doesn't hold true in every situation, but as a whole, yes, this holds true and this is what separates mirror types apart. I don't see you focusing on ethics as a way to engage with the world. I see you very much doing it through an Se-Te way. It's about the facts, how the world operates in an as-is manner and so on, what things are, that you seem to predominantly focus on when writing posts, rather than how you relate to the subject(s).

    Quote Originally Posted by _eric_ View Post
    What do you mean by negativist vs. positivist?
    http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...vist_Dichotomy

    Ok, I'm not familiar with Model A. I have never even heard of it until you mentioned it.
    Model A is socionics, heh:

    http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Model_A

    Yeah, I don't think I'm really familiar with the fundamentals. Most socionics sites I've seen don't explain that very well.
    Agreed. Well, some of them teach you the basics but it's jumbled.

    It's Ti for sure, and I agree with you thinking I am Fe-Ti. I don't know what the blocks mean though lol...socionics is confusing to me compared to MBTI.
    It's not that different, actually, just that it structures it better. So in the MBTI, you got the function order of:

    Fe
    Ni
    Se
    Ti
    ---
    Fi
    Ne
    Si
    Te

    In that order for an ENFJ. The dash marks line indicates when we move into the shadow portion of the ENFJ psyche, often not mentioned outside those that follow Beebe's model. Now, what socionics does is that it takes this structure and jumbles it into a Freudian model of ego, superego and id and separates id into two different aspects: super-id an id. Also, the way socionics approaches this is pretty much the way Freud imagined the organization of the psyche:

    Ego
    Superego
    Super-id
    Id

    Furthermore, in socionics, every block constaints two functions. These functions are what constitute the block and they are numbered and labelled which you will see when you read the article I linked about Model A. The reason why they are called functions is because they denote the function they represent in the psyche. In such a sense the model isn't that different to say, Beebe's model of archetypes and how the hero archetype represents the base function in socionics as in, it's the place where we feel the most comfortable to be and it's the most natural to us, and achievements that are a result of the base function brings great pleasure to us.

    Then each function can in turn be inhabited by what is called information element, IE. These are what we normally understand as functions outside of socionics. For example, in socionics Fe is an information element but in the MBTI it's a function.

    So the way socionics understands the equivalent of the ENFJ which is EIE or ENFj, would be like this:

    Ego block
    Fe
    Ni

    Superego
    Te
    Si

    Super-id
    Se
    Ti

    Id
    Ne
    Fi

    The ego block is exactly that - it is the ego. In Jungian typology, it represents the dominant function and the auxiliary. This is not different to the MBTI.

    In superego block we see the two opposite functions but of the same attitude. In most MBTI models these functions would either be entirely omitted or they represent one's shadow. Lenore Thomson calls these two functions the crow's nest because they can appear under times of great stress and when done so, they appear in an often very negative and repressed manner. Here we can also see a similarity to how Beebe understands these two functions which is represented in the first MBTI chart I lined out.

    In the super-id block we find Se and Ti. These are two functions are not as good and adept at using in most daily affairs but we appreciate when others help us with them. In Beebe's model, I think the super-id block is best represented as the anima/animus archetype. We tend to find people who are good at these functions attractive.

    In the super-id block we find Fi and Ne. They tend to be functions we are great at utilizing but do not choose to do so, and when we do so, it tends to be in an unconscious manner. This is why it's represented in the id, since Freud thought everything outside of consciousness is in the unconsciousness and thus represented through the id.

    As a whole, a type tends to value the IMs found in ego and super-id block but devalue those found in superego and id block. So if you remove superego and id blocks from Model A, you essentially get your typical MBTI type. It would thus look like this:

    Fe
    Ni
    (Te
    Si)
    Se
    Ti

    (Fi
    Ne)

    Does that make any sense at all?

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  3. #23
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeaT View Post
    I can see an argument for that, but most of all, what you seem to express externally is a lot of Se and Te. An ESI-Fi type would express themselves more through Fi and Ni.

    Definitely. You seem more inclined to cite facts and data or to simply make categorical distinctions than changing perspectives of things.
    You must not have notice how fiercely I defend myself and judge people over my most precious ethics. My Fi is the lens through which everything else turns.

    No idea who it is, although I wouldn't try to compare yourself too much to other people. That's how I ended up mistyping as an Fi dominant type for a couple of months because I started to become more aware of Fi within myself and this awareness made me over-identify with it as a function, so I thought I must be an Fi dominant type.
    Well, Socionics is a system of relations. This is a person had a very close, on-going, daily relation with who is also Gamma quadra, and he happens to fit the ESI description PERFECTLY. He is that guy.

    I fit SEE a lot more closely, and I think that's why some people mistake me for ENFj occasionally. But SEE-Fi, because Fi is my way of determining just about everything, I just use Se and Te to get respect in supporting it.

    I also think we had Mirror relations rather than relations of Identity.


    Mirror relations:

    These are relations of mutual correction. Mirror partners have similar interests and ideas,but a slightly different understanding of the same problems. Each partner can see only half of one problem. Therefore the partners always find what the other partner is thinking interesting. Usually partners quickly realise that they are very like-minded.

    The area of confidence of one partner is always the area of creativity for the other partner. What one partner considers solid and final appears incomplete and changeable for the other partner. This difference may often puzzle the partners especially when they fulfil their mutual plans. It seems for them as if the other partner simply misunderstood the main concept. Therefore partners attempt to correct each other's understanding but usually fail, because each partner acts from their confident side. For the same reason, Mirror partners can be involved in really hot disputes and can even come to blows in the name of their opinion.

    However, Mirror partners are often very good friends. When they work together on the same project, their mutual correction and adjustment becomes a constructive criticism that is usually accepted as useful. The main discomfort in these relations is caused by the difference in Judgement and Perception between the partners. Mirror partners generally agree about setting near future goals, but disagree about global aims.
    The only thing that isn't true about us, is that we didn't lack warmth. I think there was plenty of warmth, but that may be due to being strong feeling types, IDK.



    I am not sure the intertype system works that easily when we factor subtypes into the equation.

    Still think ESI-Se makes the most sense.

    Not so much the description but simply the way you choose to come across and interact with the world. Have you read the Meged and Ovcharov articles of how the inert and contact subtypes work in terms of metabolism flow? The tl;dr version is that for an ESI, ESI-Fi is inert, the energy flows towards introversion. You will thus as a whole see much more Fi and Ni from this person when engaging this person in communication, and the person will also appear much more reserved and less engaged with the external world.

    Then when compared the contact subtype which is ESI-Se, they will be more engaging because more energy flows towards Se and Te. Not only will they be more engaging with the external world than the inert subtype, but when engaging they will clearly do so through an Se Te lens. This is apparent with myself too, being a contact subtype, and I predominantly express myself through Te and Se respectively.

    Now, one way to discern mirror type from each other has to do with what function comes first in the ego block. This might seem obvious, SEE has base Se and creative Fi and ESI base Fi and creative Se, but when we toss in the subtypes this might not seem as obvious anymore. Not only is an SEE-Fi going to be much more introverted compared to the SEE-Se type, but an ESI-Se type is going to appear more extroverted at first glance than an ESI-Fi type.
    Yeah I am more extroverted at first glance.

    Therefore, we cannot judge these types only based on whether they seem introverted or extroverted or how energetic they are. There is a significant overlap caused by the subtypes. The way we discern these two types apart then is to look at the creative function. Why the creative and not the base? The answer is simple - in socionics, we engage with the world through the creative function. This means that for an SEE regardless if Se or Fi subtype, they will first engage with people utilizing Fi. They might for instance start a conversation with another person saying something like, "Hey, I saw this movie yesterday. This is what I thought about it. What about you? Have you seen it?" whereas an ESI would say, "I had such great food today, it tasted so great". Do you see the difference between seeking Fi evaluation and focusing on sensory stimuli?
    Yes.

    Of course, this doesn't hold true in every situation, but as a whole, yes, this holds true and this is what separates mirror types apart. I don't see you focusing on ethics as a way to engage with the world. I see you very much doing it through an Se-Te way. It's about the facts, how the world operates in an as-is manner and so on, what things are, that you seem to predominantly focus on when writing posts, rather than how you relate to the subject(s).

  4. #24
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    You must not have notice how fiercely I defend myself and judge people over my most precious ethics. My Fi is the lens through which everything else turns.
    Yes, but do you do it because you are base Se or base Fi? The portion in bold suggests base Fi.

    Well, Socionics is a system of relations. This is a person had a very close, on-going, daily relation with who is also Gamma quadra, and he happens to fit the ESI description PERFECTLY. He is that guy.
    Not necessarily. Intertype is not all there is to socionics and just because someone fits a description it doesn't mean they are that type either, necessarily. Descriptions are most of the part, pretty bad.

    I fit SEE a lot more closely, and I think that's why some people mistake me for ENFj occasionally. But SEE-Fi, because Fi is my way of determining just about everything, I just use Se and Te to get respect in supporting it.
    Functionally or in terms of descrptions?
    I also think we had Mirror relations rather than relations of Identity.
    Or maybe he was another type entirely...?

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  5. #25
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeaT View Post
    Yes, but do you do it because you are base Se or base Fi? The portion in bold suggests base Fi.

    Not necessarily. Intertype is not all there is to socionics and just because someone fits a description it doesn't mean they are that type either, necessarily. Descriptions are most of the part, pretty bad.

    Functionally or in terms of descrptions?


    Or maybe he was another type entirely...?
    Um, no he's an ISFj and he and I both agreed on it. Are you just trying to "win" or are you really trying to type me here? I'm absolutely certain of him being ISFj-Fi, and pretty sure I'm SEE-Fi.

    I agree that I'm Fi base, which is why I'm ISFP in Jung.

    If we were relations of identity, I think we would have been constantly congratulating each other on how wonderful the other was, because we approached things all the same way.

    Instead we had all of this stuff to talk about and almost never run out of things to talk about, had a very companionable vibe, but our approaches to things kind of confused or annoyed each other.

    I remember there was also this sense of both of us thinking that the other one thought he or she was better than the other one. "You think you're smarter than me," he would say. Or he'd get mad at me and say I was meaner to him than anyone. One of our last big fights before we didn't speak for six months, I felt like he was making fun of me (he was) so I started making fun of him and he was like "OH NO THIS IS WHAT YOU REALLY THINK YOU CAN'T TAKE IT BACK."

    Meanwhile, I always felt like he thought he was better than me, like he was more sophisticated, or more "together" (he's very much the tidy, under-wraps ISFj) or had better taste in music or something, and he'd always just kind of casually troll me and mock me.

    It was very much the epitome of my area of confidence being his creativity and vice versa, leading to mutual admiration and even helping each other, but also to a sense of approaching things differently and disagreeing, or even feeling inferior to the other in some area.

    Give me more resources, links and reasons why you think I'm ESI-Se rather than SEE-Fi. I'm still wondering what you see that I don't.

  6. #26
    Senior Member _eric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/so
    Socionics
    ENFj
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeaT View Post
    Does that make any sense at all?
    Yeah, it's making more sense now. And I am definitely negativist. However, you ordered the Super-id functions opposite of what is on Wikisocion (Ti then Se). Is it supposed to be the way you ordered it?

    How would being the Ni subtype fit into or change any of this, being that all of what you wrote is the EII base? Would I have to be that subtype because of being MBTI INFJ? I am definitely MBTI INFJ, and I have always tested as that (ever since I first found out about MBTI about 5 years ago), and everyone I've talked to at length who has at least some knowledge of MBTI has said I'm INFJ.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    Um, no he's an ISFj and he and I both agreed on it. Are you just trying to "win" or are you really trying to type me here? I'm absolutely certain of him being ISFj-Fi, and pretty sure I'm SEE-Fi.
    I'm not trying to win an argument or type you. I do however think rationally, logically, based on how I understand the system and based on how I've observed you interact on this forum, ESI-Se seems to be a much better fit in socionics than SEE-Fi. If you got any compelling evidence or arguments to show that you think I'm wrong, that's OK. I won't argue the point. I just wanted to present you the idea that ESI-Se could equally be a likely contender for your type.

    I agree that I'm Fi base, which is why I'm ISFP in Jung.
    Fi base or Fi dominant? IF you claim Fi base, that suggests ExI in socionics.

    If we were relations of identity, I think we would have been constantly congratulating each other on how wonderful the other was, because we approached things all the same way.
    Instead we had all of this stuff to talk about and almost never run out of things to talk about, had a very companionable vibe, but our approaches to things kind of confused or annoyed each other.

    I remember there was also this sense of both of us thinking that the other one thought he or she was better than the other one. "You think you're smarter than me," he would say. Or he'd get mad at me and say I was meaner to him than anyone. One of our last big fights before we didn't speak for six months, I felt like he was making fun of me (he was) so I started making fun of him and he was like "OH NO THIS IS WHAT YOU REALLY THINK YOU CAN'T TAKE IT BACK."

    Meanwhile, I always felt like he thought he was better than me, like he was more sophisticated, or more "together" (he's very much the tidy, under-wraps ISFj) or had better taste in music or something, and he'd always just kind of casually troll me and mock me.

    It was very much the epitome of my area of confidence being his creativity and vice versa, leading to mutual admiration and even helping each other, but also to a sense of approaching things differently and disagreeing, or even feeling inferior to the other in some area.
    There are many reasons why people can come across the way they do, or why relationships form the way they form. It doesn't mean it has to be mirror pair in intertype. Enneagram can play a large role, instincts can play a large role, already mentioned subtypes can play a large role and so on.

    I would find it difficult to attribute of you being socionics mirrors being the sole cause why you operate the way you do in this particular relationship.
    Give me more resources, links and reasons why you think I'm ESI-Se rather than SEE-Fi. I'm still wondering what you see that I don't.
    I did explain my reasoning process where I wrote that you seem to first and foremost express yourself through Se, not Fi, which suggests Se creative instead of Fi creative. This is what is written about the creative function:
    Creative function
    This function describes the primary mode of application of the base function. If the base function forms the core of the individual's personal quests and interests ("What's in it for me?", "What do I want to be?"), the creative function describes his main instrument for interacting with the rest of society ("How do I make contact with other people?"). For extroverts this means creating a context for people to interact within, and for introverts — creating a product worthy of being included in interaction.

    People use their creative function less than their base function and attach less personal significance to it, although due to the nature of blocked functions it is usually used in tandem with the base function. In their value system, their creative function activities seem less personally significant than their base function activities. When other people try to make this function the main criterion for everything, light irritation can arise, and the person may try to "correct" the other person's emphasis by presenting a perspective from his base function and suggesting that this is more important. Also, when other people express problems having to do with this information aspect, the person quickly takes interest and tries to present solutions — but always through his own base function. For instance, an SEE will try to help other people solve their Fi related problems (relationships and understanding between people) through an Se perspective (making sure you know what you want and are trying to achieve it; understanding the territorial aspect of interaction; recognizing the obvious "dumb things" that people are doing that are ruining the relationship). When people get to use their creative function to help others' problems, they feel needed and fulfilled and begin to live more fully. Likewise, criticism in this area is more sensitive and unpleasant than in the base function.

    Use of the creative function — while frequent and effortless — seems to turn on and off. One moment the person may seem highly interested in this aspect, and the next — totally indifferent. This may jar people for whom this aspect of reality is of more supreme importance and who expect more consistent attention and effort in this area. A good example of this is one's interaction with their mirror partner; each person's leading function is subject to the other's creativity function, so even though both partners do share similar worldviews, they are apt to 'correct' or add on to the other's rigid and finalized points.
    Important aspects marked in bold.

    Quote Originally Posted by _eric_ View Post
    Yeah, it's making more sense now. And I am definitely negativist. However, you ordered the Super-id functions opposite of what is on Wikisocion (Ti then Se). Is it supposed to be the way you ordered it?
    Good catch. I missed that one. You are correct, it is erraneous.

    How would being the Ni subtype fit into or change any of this, being that all of what you wrote is the EII base?
    You mean IEI (NiFe)? EII cannot be an Ni subtype since Ni is a devalued function for the EII (they are FiNe). The way the Ni subtype would change this for an IEI is how the energy flows. You will overall appear more introverted for instance, more withdrawn and more in your head. This is because you engage the introverted elements in your type more actively, in this case, Ni and Ti.

    Same would apply to an EIE (FeNi). Even if they are an extroverted type (leading with base Fe), focusing so much energy inwards will make the EIE spend more time engaging with Ni and Ti, and if Ni and Ti are strong as elements, the EIE-Ni could be mistaken for an IEI-Fe for example.

    Would I have to be that subtype because of being MBTI INFJ? I am definitely MBTI INFJ, and I have always tested as that (ever since I first found out about MBTI about 5 years ago), and everyone I've talked to at length who has at least some knowledge of MBTI has said I'm INFJ.
    Not necessarily although yes, subtypes can help explain why some people score as introverts on the MBTI test and are most likely introverts in the MBTI system, but become extroverts and vice versa in socionics. Socionics as a system concerns itself about energy flow and how this fits in the Model A. Focusing on how the IMs fit the functions is an important aspect of figuring out one's type, but it doesn't say you will necessarily be introverted or extroverted, since another and important aspect of socionics is information metabolism or energy flow.

    We can generalize and say that as a whole, introverts have their energy flowing inwards and extroverts have their energy flowing outwards. This is because introverts first and foremost seek to engage with data within themselves whereas extroverts seek to engage with data outside themselves. Obviously though, people will not fit this 100% of the time. Even if we consider the nature of the creative function, the important aspect of it highlighted in bold in the above quote directed at Marmotini, we can still take several people of the same type and we will find that some are more energetic than others. Subtype theory helps to refine this somewhat, and it's also possible to grade subtype so one can for example be an ILI-Te subtype and the Te and Se elements are strong, so it would be marked as ILI-Te +3, which is stronger than an ILI-Te +1.

    I could for instance use myself as an example here (I think I present myself at the start, if not, I'm the Asian):



    A few things to note about this video is that I'm doing most of the talking, and I'm doing it through Te. Pay attention to that what most of I what say relates to facts, figures, statistics, external logical systems such as theory and so on. Also pay attention to how I at the same time seem to withdraw while I'm doing this, as I'm constantly referring to my Ni model in order to get all this right.

    So even though I am primarily expressing myself through an extroverted element (or function outside socionics terminology), you can "see" how the energy still seems to flow inwards, towards myself. I am very sedentary, I barely move, I barely blink and I tend to mostly just Ni deadpan stare at something but this something isn't tangibly visible in the concrete world. The more focused I become on what is inside myself, the more you see how I interact less with the world too, and I become increasingly less aware of the world around me. This because that in order for me to engage fully and properly with Ni, I need to direct all energy away from Se.

    Now, compare to LXPilot/Figure, who I'd type as LIE in socionics (he might disagree with me, but it becomes apparent where the energy flows that he's an extrovert):



    You can see how Te flows more naturally from him, and he seems to overall be much more engaging when he's reciting all this facts and data.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  8. #28
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    i don't understand the logic of the subtypes. it just seems like a categorical hedge. i think enneagram + instinctual subtypes makes more sense as a differentiator or collator than socionics subtypes that to me go against the basic principles of the cognitive differentiation process (as a self-organizational reality that is relatively discrete, staged by hormonal cycles inducing critical growth periods to drive personal evolution).

    i guess i don't see how the IM, as you say, make sense linearly apart from a historical development of individuation. preference, then, would be a form of habituation based on the rise of consciousness, on the rise of the frontal cortex of the brain, the central integration system for adult autonomy and responsibility, the throne of the mind.

    what would be the central principle driving differentiation for socionics subtypes? what would be the conditions that would spark subtype differentiation? and why would these not just be a different type or a relative fluctuation of fixation that could happen for a brief, environmentally contingent period?

  9. #29
    Senior Member _eric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/so
    Socionics
    ENFj
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeaT View Post
    You mean IEI (NiFe)? EII cannot be an Ni subtype since Ni is a devalued function for the EII (they are FiNe). The way the Ni subtype would change this for an IEI is how the energy flows. You will overall appear more introverted for instance, more withdrawn and more in your head. This is because you engage the introverted elements in your type more actively, in this case, Ni and Ti.

    Same would apply to an EIE (FeNi). Even if they are an extroverted type (leading with base Fe), focusing so much energy inwards will make the EIE spend more time engaging with Ni and Ti, and if Ni and Ti are strong as elements, the EIE-Ni could be mistaken for an IEI-Fe for example.
    Oops, I meant to say EIE there, sorry. Yeah, I would definitely have to be an Ni subtype then...especially given how terrible I am with Se.
    So even though I am primarily expressing myself through an extroverted element (or function outside socionics terminology), you can "see" how the energy still seems to flow inwards, towards myself. I am very sedentary, I barely move, I barely blink and I tend to mostly just Ni deadpan stare at something but this something isn't tangibly visible in the concrete world. The more focused I become on what is inside myself, the more you see how I interact less with the world too, and I become increasingly less aware of the world around me. This because that in order for me to engage fully and properly with Ni, I need to direct all energy away from Se.
    That sounds a lot like what I do. But when I'm talking to someone, my focus shifts between two points: directly at the person on their eyes and face in general, when they are speaking, then [almost always] up and away focusing on nothing as I come up with what to say (moving away like that is mostly unconscious), then back directly at the person when I speak. If it's someone I'm comfortable with (which is rare), then I'm more able to keep my focus on them while talking. As for how expressive I am while doing so, I'm somewhere between the two of you, closer to your end though.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by _eric_ View Post
    Oops, I meant to say EIE there, sorry. Yeah, I would definitely have to be an Ni subtype then...especially given how terrible I am with Se.
    What is Se like to you anyway?

    That sounds a lot like what I do. But when I'm talking to someone, my focus shifts between two points: directly at the person on their eyes and face in general, when they are speaking, then [almost always] up and away focusing on nothing as I come up with what to say (moving away like that is mostly unconscious), then back directly at the person when I speak. If it's someone I'm comfortable with (which is rare), then I'm more able to keep my focus on them while talking. As for how expressive I am while doing so, I'm somewhere between the two of you, closer to your end though.
    Interesting. So overall, you'd say your energy flows more towards yourself? Ideally a video would be the best way for me to gauge to see what you mean, but I understand some people prefer their privacy so I won't ask.

    I think I already mentioned Gulenko's cognitive styles, but I'll do so again:
    http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...gnitive_Styles

    Do you identify more with vortical-synergetic (IEI) or dialectical-algorithmic (EIE)? I also made a pretty picture to represent how DA is like for an ILI. I think it should somewhat apply for an EIE too (at least something you should find familiar):



    Another way to try to determine type aside looking at the creative function as I suggested for Marmotini is to look at the PoLR (place of least resistance) or vulnerable function: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...rable_function

    Now, the way the PoLR works is that most people tend to experience frustration, pain and annoyance when expected to use this function. In others, the IM represented by this function tends to be seen with great disdain. This means that I'm extremely sensitive to Fe (the PoLR for an ILI is Fe), especially mushy Fe, because that's what I've been exposed to the most as a child. I view Fe, especially mushy Fe, with great contempt and when I'm expected to Fe I tend to right-out refuse, because I feel so extremely inadequate in this area. I am willing to openly admit I suck at Fe and that's all there is to it. Don't expect me to Fe because I suck.

    Telling me that I suck with Fe also reinforces my view that I suck, and telling me I should become better with Fe tends to cause great annoyance because how can I be good at something I'm so clearly and obviously suck at? I don't appreciate Fe (devalued as all superego functions are) and I don't appreciate when people tell me to appreciate something I don't appreciate and so on.

    There are times Fe is ok but it must really be subdued. EIE-Ni works better for me than EIE-Fe or IEI-Fe for example. As a whole, if I have to choose, I think I prefer EIE-Ni in general over IEI because of shared cognition style, and EIEs tend to choose to interact with people with Ni rather than Fe. Fits me better. As you can see, I am not overly fond of Fe and never have been. This is not to say I hate or dislike every person who Fe's. It just tends to get under my skin sooner or later but usually sooner if they are an Fe subtype and prefer mushy Fe. I can't help but to react that way.

    So essentially, to identify the PoLR, you could simply ask yourself, what behavior (function) tends to annoy/frustrate me the most with other people? For an EIE it would be Si, for an IEI it would be Te respectively.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-29-2013, 08:58 PM
  2. [INFJ] INFJs and being funny
    By Snow Turtle in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 02-16-2009, 12:16 AM
  3. [INFJ] INFJ and Compliments
    By chippinchunk in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 01-24-2008, 09:20 AM
  4. [INFJ] INFJ and grief
    By tovlo in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-21-2007, 06:49 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO