Each result sort of looks like the top of a pair of eyes, each beginning to roll into the back of their head.
I'm far, far closer to ISTP than INTP, that much I know. Honestly, I would have expected INTJ sooner than INTP...at least there I have some similarities.So you would rather be a called sensor when your N is obviously your highest perceiving function? And your Si is the lowest lol.
_.-~*`Evan`*~-._.-~*`INTJ`*~-._
Once again, when you become defensive, you throw any attempt at sense out the window. Does anyone understand the above statement?Haha. You are making assumptions over the internet about a person you know so little about. You're basing my character on a fantasy. Aren't you familiar with that called a lie? They do also exist on the internet... and they are plentiful in psychology if you haven't noticed. My doorstep is just down the street. In any case you're stalking a guy.
You're not using Socionics, and I don't even think you're using MBTI. My best estimate is that you're not using ANYTHING, but are simply trolling, pretending to use a system when you're alternating between approximating MBTI function orders and giving types which make no sense, for fun.Secondly, you are misconstrued again without realizing it. Socionics isn't the same as MBTI.
Saying it doesn't make it true.If my deductions are mediocre, then your one so-called original theory is putz poo on my shoe. I've never seen anything so stupid taken wholeheartedly. The funny thing is that you believe your self-satisfying correctitude to be novel, yet your incapability of invention is so evident. Basically you suck at criticizing because you have no worth. That is why no one takes you seriously when you say these things.
Aww, poor me. Well, lemons' second post on the entire forum ignorantly discounted one of my creations (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/422108-post386.html), so forgive me for not giving a damn. You might notice he also switches between MBTI and Socionics function orders (which are, in fact, mutually exclusive) regularly, without notice. Not the mark of confidence.How about your obsession with Lemons? Give it a rest already. Every one if his threads features at least a handful of your ad-hominem replies. Borderline trolling.
Whether his ideas have any merit or not, he's not going to stop simply because you want him to.
Aww, poor me. Well, lemons' second post on the entire forum ignorantly discounted one of my creations (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/422108-post386.html), so forgive me for not giving a damn.
You might notice he also switches between MBTI and Socionics function orders (which are, in fact, mutually exclusive) regularly, without notice. Not the mark of confidence.
Lemons is the man.
Everybody who's anybody knows that I give approximately 0/1 Fuck if anyone has a problem with what I say, because it's always either completely sincere, or blatant comedy.
Lemons spams the forums with complete nonsense, most of which contradicts the last thing he came up with, and I'm the only one who notices it (or at least mentions it). It's definitively worse than someone going on a profane-filled insult spree, because it gives amateur psychology a bad name. Being an amateur psychologist myself, I despise this.
That's where we differ completely. Because I think it's a sin to politely allow idiots to spout their nonsense at will.For someone who doesn't care how his posts come across you pay too much importance to reputation.
Saying dumb/naive/logically-wrong things is not a sin. Disrespect is.