Socionics quadras - How one behavioral group experiences another.

[Zarathustra]

It's not missing the point when the bulk of theory and literature is based on Augusta and Gulenko. I'm not trying to just isolate them. It's that their approach dominates socionics.

I don't even know what type Jung was tbh. MBTI started off with more balance though. Myers is the INFP, but Briggs INFJ. While the MBTI manual today is refined more by statistics than theory.

edit: Oh, and another thing about Socionics.. and it may sound funny.. but if they had bad impressions of Se, it's because they lived in SOVIET RUSSIA. lol

+1000

 

[Entropic]

snip

I am sorry, but I really fail to see the connection of this...

Well apparently you missed KDude's original point, which is that Se is poorly described in Socionics because all the theorists are NPs.

To this. I saw that post but he didn't imply all socionics are NPs in that post. He simply said the description of Se is bad because Augusta is an ILE. That he later clarifies and complains that many prominent socioinists are NPs is different.

 

[Entropic]

It's not missing the point when the bulk of theory and literature is based on Augusta and Gulenko. I'm not trying to just isolate them. It's that their approach dominates socionics.

I don't even know what type Jung was tbh. MBTI started off with more balance though. Myers is the INFP, but Briggs INFJ. While the MBTI manual today is refined more by statistics than theory.

edit: Oh, and another thing about Socionics.. and it may sound funny.. but if they had bad impressions of Se, it's because they lived in SOVIET RUSSIA. lol

Official literature maybe. I haven't read anything official. All I know is based on English translations and interpretations made by hobbyists and professional English practioners such as Rick DeLong and I have formulated more of an intuitive sense of Se since then. Although I suppose aestrivex' wikia on sensation isn't too bad (the rest I wonder how biased it is though, I haven't bothered to read all):

http://socionics.ws/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

I personally think he's an LSI and even if he's not, he self-types as ILI so that should be satisfactory enough for you then.

I mean, it's not that official sources are the only ones to go to or that we must follow their interpretations of things in a slave-like manner. Jung is usually understood as an Ni and Ti type.

 

[KDude]

Official literature maybe. I haven't read anything official. All I know is based on English translations and interpretations made by hobbyists and professional English practioners such as Rick DeLong and I have formulated more of an intuitive sense of Se since then. Although I suppose aestrivex' wikia on sensation isn't too bad (the rest I wonder how biased it is though, I haven't bothered to read all):

http://socionics.ws/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

I personally think he's an LSI and even if he's not, he self-types as ILI so that should be satisfactory enough for you then.

I mean, it's not that official sources are the only ones to go to or that we must follow their interpretations of things in a slave-like manner. Jung is usually understood as an Ni and Ti type.

Rick DeLong is ENFP

And Mormon.

Yes, I'm a bigot.

edit: Oh, that link is run by niffweed. Not rick. He's an ILI, yep (funnily, he thinks I'm ILI).

 

[Zarathustra]

I am sorry, but I really fail to see the connection of this...

Well, that's not surprising...

To this. I saw that post but he didn't imply all socionics are NPs in that post. He simply said the description of Se is bad because Augusta is an ILE.

...as you seem to have a reading comprehension problem:

The other thing about the NeTi bias is how it defines Se. It tells me more about Alpha NTs who invented the system than it does anything Se. They seem to turn Se into something obnoxiously competitive and belligerent. Se gets defined through their own avoidance of it.

 

[Entropic]

Well, that's not surprising...



...as you seem to have a reading comprehension problem:

No, because claiming NP bias is quite different to alpha NT bias. Please don't pull the whole reading comprehension crap on me. Yes, alpha NTs are NPs but so are delta NFs. He didn't mention NPs as a larger category until later.

 

[Entropic]

Rick DeLong is ENFP

And Mormon.

Yes, I'm a bigot.

edit: Oh, that link is run by niffweed. Not rick. He's an ILI, yep (funnily, he thinks I'm ILI).

Actually, I am not so sure he is based on our interactions on PersC because there are several posts he's made that really reveals a heavy ST bias on his part (especially the way he types people, he thinks I'm an IEI and a cookie cutter one for example which couldn't be further from reality) but I won't argue the point.

 

[KDude]

Actually, I am not so sure he is based on our interactions on PersC because there are several posts he's made that really reveals a heavy ST bias on his part (especially the way he types people, he thinks I'm an IEI and a cookie cutter one for example which couldn't be further from reality) but I won't argue the point.

Fair enough. I haven't spoken to him much. I just know he self-typed that. Comes off sufficiently critical enough (but that doesn't exclude LSI, you're right).

In any case, I don't care that much about either MBTI or socionics. One is enough for me to juggle around in my head. I stick around here to bullshit mostly.

 

[Zarathustra]

No, because claiming NP bias is quite different to alpha NT bias. Please don't pull the whole reading comprehension crap on me. Yes, alpha NTs are NPs but so are delta NFs. He didn't mention NPs as a larger category until later.

Yes, because his original claim was about the poor descriptions of Se due to the NTPs who dominate Socionics theory.

He then mentioned Filatova, another NP (this time NFP), further evidencing how poorly Se is represented amongst Socionics theorists.

The overarching point being that Socionics theorists, as NPs, all have a poor handle on Se.

But it's alright. I've gauged how intelligent of an interlocutor you are now.

/ demonstration of accuracy of Se's description in Socionics

 

[madhatter]

I'm undoubtedly Alpha, although I do relate some to Beta. I haven't decided on my type yet. It's probably LII, but there's a possibility that I'm ILE.

 

[Thalassa]

There's some really good information here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/15-Four-Quadra

Wow thanks for this. I can see by the negatives of what Gamma "rejects" why so many insist I'm an ESFp Gamma instead of an ISFp Alpha. I tend to embrace the realistic, confrontational interaction if its necessary, and become extremely frustrated with theoretical speculation that has nothing to do with facts/reality.

Great link. Thanks.

 

[Thalassa]

The other thing about the NeTi bias is how it defines Se. It tells me more about Alpha NTs who invented the system than it does anything Se. They seem to turn Se into something obnoxiously competitive and belligerent. Se gets defined through their own avoidance of it.

I noticed that there was an Ni dom who used to be on this forum who always referred to me as "belligerent." LOL.

Yeah ESFp in Socionics is called Napoleon. When I think of Napoleon, I actually tend to think of my ESFJ ex-friend who actually otherwise fits the Socionics ESFj description well.

It's like a perception thing, you know? I mean I think of my (honestly unbalanced) ESFj ex-friend as Napoleon (and her own INFP daughter calls her the same thing) because she basically wants to run the show socially, give everyone their task or jobs...I even thought she might be a Te rather than Fe dom when I very first met her, before I got to know her and realized it was emotional terrorism and relational organization, and that she was deeply devoted to her family, tried to charm everyone with Fe, had a lifelong agenda to be liked and popular, and frequently used statements like "we do this" and "we do that" ..."don't we?" with a smile to try to make you feel included in her Fe, and to make herself included into the other person's. She also had low patience with people with no social intelligence; like she would be tolerant of them, but I was the person, I guess with Fi, who actually had the capacity to explain to them why what they were doing didn't work, it's like she wanted them to do it, but couldn't explain to them why they "should" in the straight-foward way I could.

But that's due to my perception, and her daughter's perceptions, because we are Fi types.

So to another type, maybe Se looks that way, for different reason. Competitive. Boisterous. Obnoxious. JUST WHYYYY.

 

[Thalassa]

Actually, Dario Nardi's research disagrees with you. He recently participated in a thread on Reddit where he had a Q/A session and he mentioned how seasoned INTJ brains look a lot like the ISFP brain and vice versa and it would be very difficult to tell the two apart if he didn't know their type already just judging on what areas they use during the EEG scans.

Just because we reject our unconscious it doesn't mean it's not there. That was Jung's point too which is why he's even mentioning his theory of shadow integration to begin with.

One time on INTJforum I was mistaken for a guy in the chat room.

I think the way I choose to express myself really impacts the way people perceive me. Like on Typology Central people probably see me as some Pe/Fi hurricane of madness, throwing an Internet party, starring me, complete with lolcat jokes, snide remarks, and huge dramatic party fights.

On INTJforum, I was hardly ever there, and only made serious posts, and really basically only hung out there when JTG wanted me to go into the chat room there with him. I have no idea why he thought this was fun, upon reflection, as we could already be talking privately through a different medium, I think he liked the idea of always tormenting some group, and instead of being a lone wolf, I had become some kind of unwitting partner in crime. Or his moral support or something.

On Personality Cafe, I'm sure they see me as something much more balanced. I think I act more there like I would IRL.

I do think as people get older they more and more can mimic the type in the latter functions, when in a certain frame of mind, I talk like some kind of academic robot probing the reasons why current events are happening. I am very earnest about being SRS.

Shortnsweet even said one time that she thought I was becoming more INTJ-like the longer even that I was on this forum.

 

[Entropic]

One time on INTJforum I was mistaken for a guy in the chat room.

I think the way I choose to express myself really impacts the way people perceive me. Like on Typology Central people probably see me as some Pe/Fi hurricane of madness, throwing an Internet party, starring me, complete with lolcat jokes, snide remarks, and huge dramatic party fights.

On INTJforum, I was hardly ever there, and only made serious posts, and really basically only hung out there when JTG wanted me to go into the chat room there with him. I have no idea why he thought this was fun, upon reflection, as we could already be talking privately through a different medium, I think he liked the idea of always tormenting some group, and instead of being a lone wolf, I had become some kind of unwitting partner in crime. Or his moral support or something.

On Personality Cafe, I'm sure they see me as something much more balanced. I think I act more there like I would IRL.

I do think as people get older they more and more can mimic the type in the latter functions, when in a certain frame of mind, I talk like some kind of academic robot probing the reasons why current events are happening. I am very earnest about being SRS.

Shortnsweet even said one time that she thought I was becoming more INTJ-like the longer even that I was on this forum.

Of course, I think there's a lot to do with what Jung called persona also here. It's rare for people to get my actual gender right based on how I come across on a forum. I don't tend to flaunt with it because I find it to be mostly irrelevant information but I don't hide my preferences either. People just tend to associate certain ways of expressing yourself in text with a specific gender regardless of whether this is correct or not. I tend to come across as rather emotionless I guess and people also tend to make assumptions where they associate my persona with type. A lot of people have asked me if I'm an INTJ or suggest that I should retype to INTJ.

I think though ultimately our personality has little to do with our cognitive functions even though it's common and easy to mistake the two. So I am not sure if it's valid to say that someone can become INTJ-like or not since it's based on some stereotypical idea of what an INTJ is like to begin with which is kind of strange since I don't think there's any inform behavior what is uinque to INTJs. They all just happened to think with a preference towards Ni and T as their auxiliary.

But as we grow older and work more on our shadow integration and start accepting our shadow, I can however see how cognitively there can be more of a blur as the unconcious functions, especially the inferior, takes on less of an immature form.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I've had a hard time figuring out my socionics type. EII sounds like MBTI INFP e9 and IEI sounds like INFJ e4. So I feel stuck between them. And the functions don't help much, because they don't align with Jung, and I keep finding conflicting ideas of what they are in socionics.

As for quadras, I thought Delta might be closer to my style in that I'm serious, but then I looked at serious/merry distinctions & it stopped being as clear cut as I thought. I like a certain amount of absurdity & melodrama, which I contain because it's misunderstood in most contexts. So I haven't ruled out Beta yet either. It's hard to tell since I'm not very sociable over all.

But the intertype relations aspect of socionics keeps me wondering... MBTI doesn't cover that much.

 

[Thalassa]

I've had a hard time figuring out my socionics type. EII sounds like MBTI INFP e9 and IEI sounds like INFJ e4. So I feel stuck between them. And the functions don't help much, because they don't align with Jung, and I keep finding conflicting ideas of what they are in socionics.

As for quadras, I thought Delta might be closer to my style in that I'm serious, but then I looked at serious/merry distinctions & it stopped being as clear cut as I thought. I like a certain amount of absurdity & melodrama, which I contain because it's misunderstood in most contexts. So I haven't ruled out Beta yet either. It's hard to tell since I'm not very sociable over all.

But the intertype relations aspect of socionics keeps me wondering... MBTI doesn't cover that much.

The merry/serious dichotomy bugs me too. I read this list on 16Types that called ESFp "political merry" and ISFp "attempts to be merry."

But I think this was this person's own ideas, because ESFp is Gamma, which is serious.

Apparently merriness can only be measured in groups, it doesn't mean you have no sense of humor, can't be silly, aren't happy, etc... apparently it pertains to how you prefer to socialize.

My ESFJ ex used to tell me I could be too serious sometimes (and I thought he could be harsh, mean and critical for no apparent reason) ...so he'd definitely be an Fe quadra. He actually seems more Beta, bawdy and making stereotype jokes (which could be absolutely dark and hilarious, not stupid and mainstream, necessarily) ...so maybe he's an ENFj in Socionics.

SOCIONICS ARE VERY CONFUSING.

 

[King sns]

I'm pretty clear cut delta, but relate to some alpha values as well.. I always get the impression that gammas are doing their own thing/ may not consider interactions with others as much for some reason...I haven't looked into them as much, doesn't seem like they are on my radar. hmm... Beta philosophy is interesting for me though, I've considered it more than all the others. It seems too competitive or something/ people wanting to one up one another and feel life at the most intense level possible. Actually, gammas seem the same way except less focused on others... Seems like gammas and betas could hugely butt heads. I don't know if those are valuable ideals by themselves, though I know that many would argue that betas are more depthy than that. Regarding deltas, :yawn: ... I read that and I'm like, me? Lamest person in the world? no, no. And the universe is like "oh yes yes."

(I'm not thinking of specific individuals, i'm thinking of like some socio quidditch match- alpha is gryffindor, beta is slytherin, gamma is ravenclaw, and delta is hufflepuff?)

(what is with people splitting everyone into four groups all the time anyways.)

 

[Entropic]

I've had a hard time figuring out my socionics type. EII sounds like MBTI INFP e9 and IEI sounds like INFJ e4. So I feel stuck between them. And the functions don't help much, because they don't align with Jung, and I keep finding conflicting ideas of what they are in socionics.

As for quadras, I thought Delta might be closer to my style in that I'm serious, but then I looked at serious/merry distinctions & it stopped being as clear cut as I thought. I like a certain amount of absurdity & melodrama, which I contain because it's misunderstood in most contexts. So I haven't ruled out Beta yet either. It's hard to tell since I'm not very sociable over all.

But the intertype relations aspect of socionics keeps me wondering... MBTI doesn't cover that much.

I view merry and serious as related to Fe and Fi respectively and I think it's easier if you view it this way. Merry types prefer open displays of emotion because it sustains the group atmosphere and I think an important aspect is how merry just like Fe, is inclusive. They seek people to become a part of the group as a collective experience because if you are an outsider you kind of ruin the atmosphere. This is the most emphasized among betas and somewhat among alphas.

Then serious as related to Fi is rather the opposite, it's exclusive. Fi types gravitate towards less open displays of emotion especially when it comes to jokes, teasing and laughter. Furthermore, group participation is not expected as Fi types always gravitate towards those they find interesting talking to at the very moment due to shared interests, interesting conversation topics going on and so on. So indeed, merry and serious are noted the best in group settings.

It's rather easy to figure out as well because if you're the kind of person who rather just speak to a few people you know well and share your interests at a social gathering with many involved you are most likely a serious type, especially if loud laughter and jokes annoy you as well. If you're the kind of person who seeks inclusiveness when it comes to group participation and thinks that open expression of emotions and such is necessary and if it ruins the group atmosphere without it, you're probably merry.

I also think that alphas and betas are the ones being the most likely to throw big social gatherings as well rather than small ones. Gamma and delta types only really invite those they truly care about or have a personal interest in. Alphas and betas will be more like "bring all your friends, your brothers and sisters and their friends" kind of thing.

Perfect example of a beta gathering I was at was when I was attending one of my class mate's birthday party while I was still studying at the university and he had invited so many people to celebrate (we speak about maybe 20+, maybe even 30+ people and I'm amazed he even knew that many). It's important to notice how much of the socialization occurred not wihle people sititng down at tables and talking comfortably with low music playing (Si valuing), but instead the focus was on action such as dancing with loud music being played so actual conversation wasn't really possible. It was all about the fun atmosphere and doing something action-oriented (Se valuing) together. I was there with another one of my class mates who was also most likely a delta type and the other people at the party kept trying to invite us to dance with them even though I didn't want to. It wasn't enough telling them off once either but they kept coming back insisting that we'd dance with them and the reason for that is that they perceive us sitting on the side being gloomy as a disruption of their fun atmosphere. Eventually both of us left because it wasn't really our kind of thing. I had personally for example hoped a more low-profile kind of social gathering with people being offered drinks and maybe something to eat with music not being played as loudly in the background so you can still converse with people in a sensible manner and expect to be heard. So what really happened was the complete opposite of my favored way of socializing with other people in a group setting.

I think you can quite easily spot gamma and delta types this way because they will ultimately seek social activities or plan group outings in such a manner where the group is overall quite small, probably not more than at most 6-10 people or so (which is considered big for these quadras) and because they seek ways of still being able to communicate personally with each other. No disco dancing in other words, for most of the part. I can for example imagine a typical gamma activity to have two LIE men playing golf together (Te with Se and Ni) and a delta group spending time cooking (Te production favoring comfort aka Si). I do this a lot with my IEE friend.

 

[Entropic]

(I'm not thinking of specific individuals, i'm thinking of like some socio quidditch match- alpha is gryffindor, beta is slytherin, gamma is ravenclaw, and delta is hufflepuff?)

Thought about that already and I think the socionics quadras relate like this to each Harry Potter house:
Slytherin gamma
Ravenclaw delta
Hufflepuff alpha SF in particular
Gryffindor beta ST in particular

 

[Faceless Beauty]

This thread makes me laugh a lot more than I should. I don't know why though.

There is no button. It happens once in a blue moon. And yes, when betas try to include me at least (can't speak for other deltas) in their "play", I often don't see the point so I pull out, especially if I don't feel like it which is 99% of the case.

And I'm not sure you really want to know where things go wrong. It just tends to end up with frustration over the amount of misunderstandings on both sides eventually. If you want to find out, I'd suggest to not do it with me because I certainly am in no mood for that.

Yes, that's me being delta-grumpy so take that as an example.

Interesting. I can't say that I view Alphas that way most of the time. I find that I get fairly well with some Alphas, especially of the ENTP variety. Ti dominants in general are another story for another day though. Enneagram and other things would probably play more of a role overall though.

As for grumpiness, turn the frowns upside down, sunshine.
(I will refer to you as sunshine from now on just to piss you off )

Actually, I can do the Fe thing and I have done it. I have to be pretty provoked but there have been times when people have gotten out of hand with the insults and I have intervened. Hasn't happened that much but it's happened.

Also, there have been times where I have been tempted to intervene but experience or something told me to do so would be fruitless. Maybe it's my knowledge of the people- they are are the types that aren't going to care about hurting others' feelings and thus won't be receptive to feedback. Also intervening could make me a potential target for their verbal barbs.

Interesting. I have that attitude towards most things, but rather than drawing from experience I gauge whether or not I will be directly impacted by a situation and if I really cared enough to get involved in the first place.

No words. Just kick their ass. That works....sometimes.

Getting shit done is usually the best way to go about getting results I guess. Necessary evil I suppose.

Remember, you're speaking to someone who's likely Se vulnerable.

Kicking someone's ass isn't exactly in my repertoire of behaviors.

I don't think all Se base and creative types are apt to do so either.

Actually, I don't mind violence as a last resort despite being Se PoLR. I think a good slap in the face can sometimes say more than thousand words but most importantly, there comes to a point where a person gets so stuck up in their current "energy level" that simply trying to argue them out of it is not going to work. Then a kind but physical reminder helps to break our focus. It works on dogs, I know it also works on humans. LOL. It doesn't mean I think someone should beat someone else up senselessly though.

I don't think Se PoLR has to only appear as a feeling of being against violence or people who swear (well, if that's true, no wonder people think I'm an ESI and then I'm probably am one). It's more about an inability to process Se information and when delivered to you it just makes you feel very uncomfortable. As a perfect example, I'm a big fan of violent movies and games almost to the point where the bloodier the better (as long as it's stylish), but if someone tells me that a chair has only one point of use (Se + Ni), I'll immediately go, "no, think of all the other possibilities you can use a chair for!".

Also, it should be noted before someone says anything, that while I may think that stylish violence is entertaining on the big screen, it doesn't mean I think violence for the sake of power is ok. But controlled circumstances? Yes, definitely. As long someone is not hurt for real.

Your "Se hate" is kind of showing here. Albeit subtle.

Alphas: I feel like I should like alphas. They seem cheerful, creative, and generally well meaning, which are all good things, so I'm not really sure about the reasons behind the disconnect that actually exists. One thing that does rub me the wrong way about alpha NTs is their inclination to turn things that I take seriously into a theme of lighthearted speculation or joking. It's awkward and annoying.

Betas: Betas are colorful and exciting. I often find their style aesthetically pleasing, but their shenanigans and histrionics can get a bit too much for me to take. It's not hard to detach from it though. They are irritating but entertaining. The bulk of my experience with betas has been with IEIs. Some of them are lovely, others I want to punch in the face.

I'm tossing up gamma and delta for myself. There are things I identify with in both quadras and other things that I find uncomfortable to deal with.

Gamma: I admire gamma drive and focus, and I think they're capable of tremendous insight. However, it bothers me when they glorify being cruel and vindictive for no apparent reason other than to make a show of strength. They're hard to get to know because they are so self-contained and have a standoffish "I already have all the friends I need" attitude to new people, and those are both traits that I possess myself, so the initial barrier can be hard to breach. However, things proceed very well after that's been accomplished.

Deltas: Deltas seem like the "salt of the earth" quadra to me. I admire their patience, self-reliance, and humility, but honestly, they kinda make me feel bad about myself, like I'm just not as good a person, or like I'm an un-evolved member of their tribe. However, the same things that trigger feelings of inferiority or guilt can irritate me in other respects, because I frequently perceive them as preachy or boring. I get along very well with some of them but the others kind of blur together for me.

What you said about alphas and gamma were very interesting, and shows why I had a hard time placing myself in socionics at first when I looked at the quadra. My demeanor sometimes comes off as what you described as "typical alpha NT behavior" where I make fun of things that other people take seriously, but people who have really gotten to know me like [MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION] would describe me as an overly ambitious and driven gamma to the point where it bores her. Even in reading about the values of the quadra, I find that I relate to both alpha and gamma quadra even though all the quadra are more or less annoying to be quite honest.

I wouldn't consider myself as deliberately vindictive, and I guess I just have a streak of self-preservation that might irk some people. If they can't deal with it, fine. As for friends and meeting new people, I guess I can come off as standoffish to some people. But I don't feel obliged to regard every person that I cross paths with in an "open, loving, kumbaya, fluff, bullshit" manner like some people do. Besides, whenever I do, it's all wrong and comes out weird. I act the way I do with people not because I like someone better or I dislike that person in particular, but I prefer to remain detached from and indifferent to the person.

After reading a lot of the responses and thinking a bit, I do think that a misunderstanding of or a certain attitude towards Se does play into the caricatures that Beta and Gamma quadra are painted with, though. It's like they are more or less somewhere between nature's assholes and drama queens if not both.

Actually, I am not so sure he is based on our interactions on PersC because there are several posts he's made that really reveals a heavy ST bias on his part (especially the way he types people, he thinks I'm an IEI and a cookie cutter one for example which couldn't be further from reality) but I won't argue the point.

Lol are we really talking about him still? Damn.
Why place him as a Beta though? It could work but I'm not sure if he's beta ST.

Fair enough. I haven't spoken to him much. I just know he self-typed that. Comes off sufficiently critical enough (but that doesn't exclude LSI, you're right).

In any case, I don't care that much about either MBTI or socionics. One is enough for me to juggle around in my head. I stick around here to bullshit mostly.

That's why I hang out on most forums too. Plus making fun of people and certain topics is actually kind of funny.

Of course, I think there's a lot to do with what Jung called persona also here. It's rare for people to get my actual gender right based on how I come across on a forum. I don't tend to flaunt with it because I find it to be mostly irrelevant information but I don't hide my preferences either. People just tend to associate certain ways of expressing yourself in text with a specific gender regardless of whether this is correct or not. I tend to come across as rather emotionless I guess and people also tend to make assumptions where they associate my persona with type. A lot of people have asked me if I'm an INTJ or suggest that I should retype to INTJ.

I think though ultimately our personality has little to do with our cognitive functions even though it's common and easy to mistake the two. So I am not sure if it's valid to say that someone can become INTJ-like or not since it's based on some stereotypical idea of what an INTJ is like to begin with which is kind of strange since I don't think there's any inform behavior what is uinque to INTJs. They all just happened to think with a preference towards Ni and T as their auxiliary.

But as we grow older and work more on our shadow integration and start accepting our shadow, I can however see how cognitively there can be more of a blur as the unconcious functions, especially the inferior, takes on less of an immature form.

If you're an INTJ, then ESFP, SEE-Se, CP 6w5 sx/sp is my legitimate typing across the board and my whole life has been a huge lie.

The funny thing is that I thought you were probably a female who probably doesn't express "feminine" personality traits when I first saw your posts on the other forum. Not sure what exactly gave me that impression.

I think it's amusing when people use stereotypes and certain mannerisms to justify why they think you are X type. On the cafe, I often get told that I come off as ENTPish because I like to troll types. On the other hand, people have told me that I can be very critical like an Fi dominant or E1. I'm lazy like a 9 or competency driven like a 3. So I've made it a point to keep trolling types to see what else people come up with as far as their perception of me is concerned.

As for what I think about the quadra specifically:

Alphas- Quite light in every sense of the word. It can be a very good thing, but when it's time to get down to business and come back to Earth a bit, my patience levels drop. Alpha NTs aren't so bad, some ESFj's are fine. ISFp's (MBTI's ISFJ) are people I don't always vibe with so well.

Betas- I find members of this quadra either cute and delightful or just 50 shades of obnoxious. The melodramatics are a bit of a turn-off, as well as the excessive focus on group atmosphere. It seems very draining to invest that much concern for the external environment I guess. SLE's and IEI's tend to be my favorites out of this batch though.

Gammas- I don't like how they are portrayed as cutthroat individuals who need to pull the sticks that are firmly lodged up their asses out, but this quadra is okay on the whole overall. That's probably because I find that they'd be the least bothered by my general attitude towards people I meet for the first time.

Deltas- They're okay too I guess, but I find that some of them trade functionality for style too much for my liking, and are aesthetes to a semi-obnoxious degree. Their brand of aristocracy is just weird to me compared to that of Beta quadra, I am not sure why though. The earthiness is cozy, but meh. They're amusing in their own way I guess, especially when it comes to the things that get them worked up. I attract all the Fi doms from this quadra it would seem.