User Tag List

First 123

Results 21 to 22 of 22

  1. #21
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    461 so/sx


    Quote Originally Posted by Stansmith View Post
    The 4 most people envision is the social last or sexual dominant (there seems to be an Sp and/or Sx bias in the way most types in general are described on here), but what does a Social dominant 4 look like? Are they more (reluctantly) conformist?
    I am a social 4. It's a tug of war on some issues. Who isn't conflicted/confused sometimes about issues that matter to them? My tug of wars often involve feeling fake or conforming and going along to get along vs. do the "right" thing and being "real". Learning to choose your battles minimizes this.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #22
    Senior Member Venus Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    4w5 sx/so


    I’m really beginning to question the idea that softness and non-competitive nature automatically equals social instinct, and in this case, social 4.

    I don’t like the Naranjo descriptions and I don’t understand why they continue to be used without being scrutinized for accuracy (do these subtypes actually look like this in real life?). I at least, don’t.

    By the way, EIIs are typically and often, described as shy and “bashful.”

    To chalk it all up to social makes zero sense to me. Specially given that sx and so are not close for me, but people sometimes read the NN descriptions and go “oh, social,” even though I have never shown much concern for the social stuff. Unless it’s one of those few things that bothers me.

    And it would also also make it sound like se-polrs can’t be sx dom, which yet again, would be a pretty bold claim.

    The Naranjo description by comparison:

    Oh and, Type 3 is what's connected with wanting to "push themselves to always be the best." 4 in and of itself is described as a withdrawn type, who "overuse imagination in search of self." Sexual instinct is defined as concerned with chemistry, attraction, and pair-bonding. The whole sexual 4 description sounds overly 3, and it doesn't make sense to me to assume all sx 4s have that amount of 3 influence. There is nothing in the 4 itself or the sexual instinct, that necessitates that amount of ruthlessness and aggression for "sexual 4." Sexual instinct is not aggressive in terms to socionics Se or force; they are merely more outspoken, and won't back down, compared to others of the same type, yes even EIIs. And they have a 'pointed/penetrating' energy to them. This does not translate into literally wanting to harm someone.

    I know that descriptions aren't meant to capture everyone in that population, but the sx 4s I have come across have almost all have said they are not like this.
    EII | INFP
    4w5-9w1-6w5 sx/so
    Likes Luminous liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. What cognitive functions are often confused with each other and how are they confused
    By The Great One in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 09-24-2013, 09:55 PM
  2. [ISTJ] ISTJs are they all in the can for Mc Cain?
    By hermeticdancer in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 11-12-2008, 01:54 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