User Tag List

First 91718192021 Last

Results 181 to 190 of 208

  1. #181
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by /DG/ View Post
    Yes, my previous username was DisneyGeek. I think I have said ISTJ for a majority of the time, but at some point I was floating around other ideas, most notably ISFP.

    Essentially I identify with all of the IS__ types more than other tyes.

    Yeah, I could definitely see myself as a blended type, though I was mostly speaking in terms of pure types. Looking back at the descriptions, I am changing my mind a bit from earlier (I didn't re-examine the descriptions). In control, I am definitely phlegmatic or a phlegmatic blend (not sure which because the blends are all so similar), not pure melancholy.

    I still stand by supine (or supine-phlegmatic as you've stated) in inclusion aside from the one sentence on being relationship-oriented. I wonder if maybe the thing that is conflating things is that I am likely a melancholy in affection. I know the affection bits don't seem to be involved in the other bits, but perhaps this is why thing don't seem to fit precisely.

    Sorry, I was confusing structure/motive with movement/control somehow...

    What I am essentially trying to get at here is that I am a very task-focused person. If I am understanding things correctly, this equates to in-charge or chart-the-course interaction styles, no? But I don't really have a need to be a very directive person unless I am stressed or something needs to be done ASAP, etc.

    So it isn't about me necessarily needing to be a thinking type, but rather that I just do not identify with the behind-the-scenes interaction style...even though I am not necessarily a very directing person.

    Phlegmatic seems to be the "path of least resistance" temperament. They can take or leave controlling others and being controlled by others. I feel this way, unless under stress, a strict deadline, if something really needs to be done the "right" way (for example, if people working on a project are doing it poorly or something similar), and related scenarios. Then, I can become rather directing, but for the most part I don't really like doing that and prefer to share the responsibilities.

    This is one bit that I've never been able to put into words very well. I guess I just have a lot of faith in facts, data, things you can see and touch. I don't have a lot of use for pointless debates about theoretical nonsense (though MBTI and other pointless personality games are fun :p). I'm not interested in talking about how to change the world...either do something about it or stop talking. I'm not necessarily a very practical person, but I have a large appreciation for practicality. I know there is a bit more to the S/N division than that, but there you go.
    I should ask what you really mean by "task-focus". Even though it is the classic name for "low wanted behavior", basically, the Supine is described as using tasks a lot. You can break it down:
    Sanguine: people for people's sake
    Choleric: people for tasks sake (i.e. "goals")
    Supine: task for peope's sake ("acts of service", etc)
    Melancholy: tasks for tasks sake

    (Basically, these correspond to "express for wanted sake", where the "sake" is what we normally judge "people vs task" by, and the first part is basically I/E (how we approach people).
    So if you're Supine, you might identify with "tasks", but the tasks are really to gain acceptance by people, where for the Melancholy, while being also loyal when doing things for people, generally approaches tasks for their own sake.

    Also, as I've been saying, yes, being Melancholy in Affection may also skew things, for type does not divide interpersonal relations between surface and deeper relations. So a different tyemperament in both areas would end up having to be a type falling into one Interaction Style, yet have some traits not fitting the one for that type.

    You're saying you're not Behind the scenes. What is it about Chart the Course that you identify with more? I would allow that Affection is actually your Interaction Style instead of Inclusion (I call this an "invert", and I've seen others here in the past who this seemed to fit). and if you're an SJ (you definitely do sound like an S from that standpoint description) that's "moderate" enough to end up in Phlegmatic in Control, then you could be an ISTJ Supine-Phlegmatic-Melancholy (SPM).

    Quote Originally Posted by RobinSkye View Post
    According to the chart, I think I'm somewhere toward the center under the melancholy-phlegmatic "loner" row. Reading through the descriptions on the site, all of them have at least one point that clearly contradict my temperament.
    "Loner" is a pure Melancholy in Inclusion (green), while MelancholyPhlegmatic in that area is apart of "Cautious Association".
    Have you looked at the descriptions for each area? (Inclusion, Control and Affection. It's one for each).
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  2. #182
    What Is Life? RobinSkye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    541 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj Ne
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I should ask what you really mean by "task-focus". Even though it is the classic name for "low wanted behavior", basically, the Supine is described as using tasks a lot. You can break it down:
    Sanguine: people for people's sake
    Choleric: people for tasks sake (i.e. "goals")
    Supine: task for peope's sake ("acts of service", etc)
    Melancholy: tasks for tasks sake

    (Basically, these correspond to "express for wanted sake", where the "sake" is what we normally judge "people vs task" by, and the first part is basically I/E (how we approach people).
    So if you're Supine, you might identify with "tasks", but the tasks are really to gain acceptance by people, where for the Melancholy, while being also loyal when doing things for people, generally approaches tasks for their own sake.

    Also, as I've been saying, yes, being Melancholy in Affection may also skew things, for type does not divide interpersonal relations between surface and deeper relations. So a different tyemperament in both areas would end up having to be a type falling into one Interaction Style, yet have some traits not fitting the one for that type.

    You're saying you're not Behind the scenes. What is it about Chart the Course that you identify with more? I would allow that Affection is actually your Interaction Style instead of Inclusion (I call this an "invert", and I've seen others here in the past who this seemed to fit). and if you're an SJ (you definitely do sound like an S from that standpoint description) that's "moderate" enough to end up in Phlegmatic in Control, then you could be an ISTJ Supine-Phlegmatic-Melancholy (SPM).



    "Loner" is a pure Melancholy in Inclusion (green), while MelancholyPhlegmatic in that area is apart of "Cautious Association".
    Have you looked at the descriptions for each area? (Inclusion, Control and Affection. It's one for each).
    Ohp, found it, thanks. Temperament:Melancholy Phlegmatic in Control

    Control Melancholy-phlegmatic. What does this entail?
    Ti = Ne > Ni > Si > Te = Fi > Se > Fe
    5w4 - 4w3 - 1w9
    Chaotic-True Neutral.

    My Socionics test result: http://www.sociotype.com/tests/resul....V8bh7vuL.dpuf

  3. #183
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Would be between SJ and NF, though again, INTP's often get something like that because of the overall blend of temperaments. They're not aware of their high expressed Control (what amounts to "pragmatism") because of the reservation of the introversion.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  4. #184
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I should ask what you really mean by "task-focus". Even though it is the classic name for "low wanted behavior", basically, the Supine is described as using tasks a lot. You can break it down:
    Sanguine: people for people's sake
    Choleric: people for tasks sake (i.e. "goals")
    Supine: task for peope's sake ("acts of service", etc)
    Melancholy: tasks for tasks sake

    (Basically, these correspond to "express for wanted sake", where the "sake" is what we normally judge "people vs task" by, and the first part is basically I/E (how we approach people).
    So if you're Supine, you might identify with "tasks", but the tasks are really to gain acceptance by people, where for the Melancholy, while being also loyal when doing things for people, generally approaches tasks for their own sake.
    It's hard for me to say. I guess I am never one who has focused too much on the lives of other people. Maybe I am just too self-absorbed, but I tend not to dive deep into other people and instead focus on the things we are doing together. I have become more aware of people in the last several years, but I still feel more comfortable dealing with "thing"-related issues as opposed to interpersonal ones. For example, I really do not want a career that has me focusing on people (nurse, customer service, etc.).

    But yet, I identify with supine in inclusion because I really need other people (but don't show it obviously). For better or for worse, humans are social creatures. Even when I am in a terrible mood...somehow whenever someone talks to me about whatever random bullshit, I tend to light up and forget about my problems. I need to talk to people to be happy.

    In your simplistic description, I identify with supine and melancholy, depending on my mood.

    Also, as I've been saying, yes, being Melancholy in Affection may also skew things, for type does not divide interpersonal relations between surface and deeper relations. So a different tyemperament in both areas would end up having to be a type falling into one Interaction Style, yet have some traits not fitting the one for that type.

    You're saying you're not Behind the scenes. What is it about Chart the Course that you identify with more? I would allow that Affection is actually your Interaction Style instead of Inclusion (I call this an "invert", and I've seen others here in the past who this seemed to fit). and if you're an SJ (you definitely do sound like an S from that standpoint description) that's "moderate" enough to end up in Phlegmatic in Control, then you could be an ISTJ Supine-Phlegmatic-Melancholy (SPM).
    I'll admit that I relate more to behind the scenes than I do with the extraverted interaction styles, but still not as much as chart the course. When we have a task to do, I'm interested in progressing towards the task (when I am not being lazy). I'm not interested in debate and meandering around the goal for people to dick around. I just want to accomplish the goal. There is a time and a place to dick around...and when you are working as a group to accomplish a goal is not one of them.

    Obviously this tends to relate more to work scenarios, but I'll give an example of when it doesn't. I'm involved at school with a dance club...choreographed dancing, that is, not club dancing. When I go to practices, I love socializing with everyone, but I absolutely hate it when we just sit around and don't actually practice the dances at practice. There is a way to both socialize and still stay on the task at hand, but our current leader doesn't seem interested in doing so. So I guess it comes down to this...when there is a task...I want it to be accomplished in the time we allotted to do so. It's also one of the reasons I've always hated group projects...people like meeting together to work on it, but that is incredibly inefficient. What I like to do is decide who works on what part, then meet together when we are done to go over anything that needs tweaking. It's just more efficient that way, and you don't end up with people dicking around and wasting time. I dunno if any of that made the sense that I am trying to make.

    The affection bit as my interaction style could make sense, seeing as it's how I express myself/desire for people to express to me. So why is it that for the most part, you appear to look mostly at only the inclusion and control aspects for type correlations? I haven't read all of your website by any means, but it appears to focus on the first two and the affection aspect isn't related back as much. Why does this "flip" seem to only happen in some people?

    (I just realized I used the phrase "dick around" a lot...)

  5. #185
    You are what you love themightyfetus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    3w2 so/sx
    Socionics
    ESE Si
    Posts
    2,624

    Default

    I think I am Supine-Phlegmatic, Supine-Sanguine, or Phlegmatic-Sanguine.
    Yet I know, if I stepped aside
    Released the controls, you would open my eyes
    That somehow, all of this mess
    Is just my attempt to know the worth of my life
    .

    Mercury - Sleeping At Last

    3w2 // 6w7 // 9w1

  6. #186
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by themightyfetus View Post
    I think I am Supine-Phlegmatic, Supine-Sanguine, or Phlegmatic-Sanguine.
    Seems to correlate with INFP, then possibly ISFP. :p
    Likes themightyfetus liked this post

  7. #187
    Sweet Summer Dik Dik yama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    I'm Fe
    Posts
    7,668

    Default

    I just took a look at this.

    Based on the pages with the descriptions for each one, what I think I relate to the most is:

    Inclusion: Phlegmatic Melancholy
    Control: Supine
    Affection: Phlegmatic Supine

    Now what's all that mean? I can't wrap my head around all these connections and correlations. :p
    MBTI: ESFJ
    Enneagram: 6w7 9w1 2w3 so/sx
    Temperament: Phlegmatic | Sanguine
    Astrology: Leo Sun | Aries Moon | Leo Rising
    Johari | Nohari

    not a type description

  8. #188
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by /DG/ View Post
    It's hard for me to say. I guess I am never one who has focused too much on the lives of other people. Maybe I am just too self-absorbed, but I tend not to dive deep into other people and instead focus on the things we are doing together. I have become more aware of people in the last several years, but I still feel more comfortable dealing with "thing"-related issues as opposed to interpersonal ones. For example, I really do not want a career that has me focusing on people (nurse, customer service, etc.).

    But yet, I identify with supine in inclusion because I really need other people (but don't show it obviously). For better or for worse, humans are social creatures. Even when I am in a terrible mood...somehow whenever someone talks to me about whatever random bullshit, I tend to light up and forget about my problems. I need to talk to people to be happy.

    In your simplistic description, I identify with supine and melancholy, depending on my mood.

    I'll admit that I relate more to behind the scenes than I do with the extraverted interaction styles, but still not as much as chart the course. When we have a task to do, I'm interested in progressing towards the task (when I am not being lazy). I'm not interested in debate and meandering around the goal for people to dick around. I just want to accomplish the goal. There is a time and a place to dick around...and when you are working as a group to accomplish a goal is not one of them.

    Obviously this tends to relate more to work scenarios, but I'll give an example of when it doesn't. I'm involved at school with a dance club...choreographed dancing, that is, not club dancing. When I go to practices, I love socializing with everyone, but I absolutely hate it when we just sit around and don't actually practice the dances at practice. There is a way to both socialize and still stay on the task at hand, but our current leader doesn't seem interested in doing so. So I guess it comes down to this...when there is a task...I want it to be accomplished in the time we allotted to do so. It's also one of the reasons I've always hated group projects...people like meeting together to work on it, but that is incredibly inefficient. What I like to do is decide who works on what part, then meet together when we are done to go over anything that needs tweaking. It's just more efficient that way, and you don't end up with people dicking around and wasting time. I dunno if any of that made the sense that I am trying to make.

    The affection bit as my interaction style could make sense, seeing as it's how I express myself/desire for people to express to me. So why is it that for the most part, you appear to look mostly at only the inclusion and control aspects for type correlations? I haven't read all of your website by any means, but it appears to focus on the first two and the affection aspect isn't related back as much. Why does this "flip" seem to only happen in some people?

    (I just realized I used the phrase "dick around" a lot...)
    Yeah, you sound like a very typical ISTJ-Melancholy (grew up under two of them, plus a whole bunch of others around, so I can spot them a mile away).

    I see you're using the Interaction Style "cross factors" of "process vs outcome" (formerly control vs movement), which is the factor I've discussed the least, though as a BtS, I to can testify to wanting outcomes rather than processes (like I use paying bills as an example. I want it all paid off where my GtG wife doesn't mind bargaining with partial payments and catching up more slowly). But what you're describing sounds actually more like a Melancholy or CtC/SJ [or just "J" in general] "business before pleasure" mindset. I hadn't really gotten into that other factor, because it seems to be easily confused with other aspects of the temperaments, and I'm not sure where those poles even came from (i.e. how they're related to the main two, of I/E and directing/informing).
    In APS, the cross factor (tying together opposites) are that the Melancholy and Sanguine are more "direct" (express what they want, and want what they express, either a lot or a little interaction), while the Supine and Choleric are "indirect": the Supine doesn't express as much as he wants (and "want" will be further clarified below), while the Choleric does express, but really only for his goals and terms, and so is considered not really "wanting".
    Then Keirsey himself went on and added another corresponding factor for the same groups, called "interlinking vs intersecting" (the passive-responsive "Responder" [his name for the BtS] will "interlink" with the aggressive-directive "Initiator" or In Charge. One will naturally lead the other, who is willing for someone else to take the lead). That one too, is clearly obvious how it relates to the other two dimensions.

    So I wouldn't go just by "process/outcome" in deciding between BtS and CtC.

    Regarding "task" orientation, here are some excerpts from this book http://jacksonsnyder.com/mgi/studies/GCY.pdf I review here: https://erictb.wordpress.com/2014/02...d-created-you/

    "Melody Melancholy [a hypothetical 'character' he created for the temperament] is a task oriented
    person. She understands tasks and systems much better than
    she understands people
    . As far as I can tell, the Melancholy in Inclusion
    is not born with any relationship skills. All these skills must be learned.
    "

    As for your Inclusion "needs":

    "Being a natural loner and introvert (this does not mean Melody
    Melancholy does not have any social needs, she has more than she admits
    to even to herself
    ) provides her with the opportunity to think.

    Melvin Melancholy does not need a high amount of social
    interaction. Relationship-oriented temperaments do not understand this
    about him and think he will be happier being more social. They devise
    ways to cunningly get him into social settings. Being forced (real or
    perceived) to socialize causes Melvin Melancholy stress and anxiety.
    Being around people for long periods of time in a social setting causes
    him stress and anxiety. He usually needs more social interaction than he
    likes to admit
    . He likes to convey to the world he wants to be a hermit,
    but this is only true in his own mind. In reality, Melvin Melancholy
    needs and enjoys social interaction, when it is his choice to socialize.

    Even this is tiring for the Melancholy. Relationship-oriented
    temperaments, like the Sanguine, draw energy and enjoyment from being
    around people. It is the opposite for task-oriented temperaments. People
    drain energy from Melvin Melancholy.

    Melvin Melancholy tends to be selective with whom he socializes. He
    tends to make people jump through many hoops before they can be
    considered friends and social interaction is possible
    . Social interaction
    is not readily available to mere acquaintances – and for Melvin
    Melancholy there is a distinct difference between acquaintances and
    friends. Thus loneliness becomes a problem. Too often he finds himself
    in this position: What is this strange thing I am feeling? It is not hunger.
    It is not the flu. I am not depressed. Oh, it is loneliness. And even then,
    he does not know what to do to combat it.
    Melvin Melancholy knows loneliness all too well because he does
    not show his tender feelings.

    Because he is not showing
    these feelings, people are not showing these feelings towards him. This
    causes a person to be lonely.
    "

    To this, I later pointed out:
    "this is based on a point that everyone really has the same needs, such as interaction with others, affection, recognition and independence. The Melancholy conveys little need of any interaction, though still has it. So 'Want' simply refers to the typical way the temperament goes about getting their need met, while 'need' in that respect is a basic human need. The Melancholy says 'I don’t want', and truly in his mind doesn’t want, yet the underlying need is still there.”

    Just like the functions and archetypal complexes we discuss in type are about "awareness", the temperaments, also being complexes, are also about awareness of needs. (And hence, about the "understanding" of tasks or people better). So when the need is not being met, then the Melancholy is more likely to be aware of it. The difference with the Supine, is that they start out more aware of the need, but are simply too shy to approach others on their own."

    So do you think this might explain why you identify with Supine in Inclusion? (The actual APS would sort it out, as it uses techniques in both the questionnaire and the way it is administered, that bring out the true need, rather than just relying on behavior, as we are doing here). Can you identify with responding to people in that way?

    Otherwise, it may just be the Affection coloring the type profession, as I've said. Or, being inbetween on the wanted Inclusion scale (MP or SP).

    The reason why I focus on the first two areas, is because they seem to be what most closely correspond to Interaction Style and Keirsey temperament, respectively. Once you have those, the type is complete, so there's no room for a third matrix like that (unless you just rehash the other dimensions already present, as Keirsey had been doing in his last book, but then there will be a lot of overlap).
    So realizing that Affection might include traits connected with Interaction Style (for it is basically a deeper level of "interaction"), I realized that those might possibly be picked up in the person's type preference as the true "style" of interaction. (For many people, such as myself, Inclusion and Affection are the same or similar temperaments, so there's no conflict. So I'm on both fronts, a solid "Behind the Scenes"). But they can be different, and we have to allow that these different traits may show up, explaining variation in their type.

    Quote Originally Posted by themightyfetus View Post
    I think I am Supine-Phlegmatic, Supine-Sanguine, or Phlegmatic-Sanguine.
    There's no Supine-Sanguine, in any one area. "Supine-Sanguine" would be something like Supine in Inclusion, Sanguine in Control, but you're saying the whole blend lies within Control. For something between Supine and Sanguine in that area, look at Phlegmatic-supine and Phlegmatic-sanguine. ("Phlegmatic-" in that case, indicating "expressiveness" is moderate, which lies between Supine [low] and Sanguine [high]).
    So this would basically be either NF or SP, and thus (As DG said), would point to ISFP or INFP.

    Quote Originally Posted by 21lux View Post
    I just took a look at this.

    Based on the pages with the descriptions for each one, what I think I relate to the most is:

    Inclusion: Phlegmatic Melancholy
    Control: Supine
    Affection: Phlegmatic Supine

    Now what's all that mean? I can't wrap my head around all these connections and correlations. :p
    Inclusion; on the "I" side, but bordering on E. Control would be NF.
    So, do you think, INFJ?
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas
    Likes themightyfetus, /DG/, yama liked this post

  9. #189
    Sweet Summer Dik Dik yama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    I'm Fe
    Posts
    7,668

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Inclusion; on the "I" side, but bordering on E. Control would be NF.
    So, do you think, INFJ?
    Interesting! I'll have to look into it more at some point. Though I doubt I would be an Ni dom.
    MBTI: ESFJ
    Enneagram: 6w7 9w1 2w3 so/sx
    Temperament: Phlegmatic | Sanguine
    Astrology: Leo Sun | Aries Moon | Leo Rising
    Johari | Nohari

    not a type description

  10. #190
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Well, since it borders on E, you could be ENFJ, where Ni would be aux. and Fe dom. And it's possible the "Phlegmatic" part of the Inclusion might indicate the ISF/INP group (this way of doing it is not exact), and with the Control, would add up to INFP. Are you sure of ISFJ, or at least some of the letters?
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas
    Likes yama liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] NTs and Affection
    By Brendan in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-16-2009, 02:40 AM
  2. [INTP] INTP and affection
    By KLessard in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 01-03-2009, 08:22 PM
  3. Type and Affective Dreams
    By beyondaurora in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-23-2008, 07:23 PM

Posting Permissions

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