• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

ILI-INTp or LII-INTj?

Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
Why does it matter? Assuming you knew definitively what your type was, what then would you do with that knowledge that you cannot already do right now?

1 year and a half of reasearch, tests, books, hours of school spent to think about it. It's not about what "I can do with my type" it's just "I wanna know my type". If so, I wouldn't be here, right? Just wasting my time maybe.
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
1 year and a half of reasearch, tests, books, hours of school spent to think about it. It's not about what "I can do with my type" it's just "I wanna know my type". If so, I wouldn't be here, right? Just wasting my time maybe.

From the perspective of an ILI, knowledge without a purpose is a waste of time, yes.

So that also helps to clarify you are probably not an ILI. ILIs are interested in knowledge because they want to apply it and make use of it. LII are more interested in knowledge for the sake of it, for the pure satisfaction of knowing, because the more knowledge they possess, the larger their logical framework becomes with which to explain all the aspects of reality.
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
From the perspective of an ILI, knowledge without a purpose is a waste of time, yes.

So that also helps to clarify you are probably not an ILI. ILIs are interested in knowledge because they want to apply it and make use of it. LII are more interested in knowledge for the sake of it, for the pure satisfaction of knowing, because the more knowledge they possess, the larger their logical framework becomes with which to explain all the aspects of reality.

You may be right on this. But what about my Fe PoLR? It's so striking. An LII has Se as PoLR and Fe as suggestive function, right? I don't seem to need an emotionally positive environment and I don't like it when people try to involve me in anything that has little interest to me (such as parties). Are you sure that I really have a strong Ne? I don't like surprises or changes and yes, I value ideas, but not too many of them. I prefer choosing one and continue with that. From this point of view I'm quite practical.
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
You may be right on this. But what about my Fe PoLR? It's so striking. An LII has Se as PoLR and Fe as suggestive function, right? I don't seem to need an emotionally positive environment and I don't like it when people try to involve me in anything that has little interest to me (such as parties). Are you sure that I really have a strong Ne? I don't like surprises or changes and yes, I value ideas, but not too many of them. I prefer choosing one and continue with that. From this point of view I'm quite practical.

I also don't like parties, and I have no interest in things that I have no interest in. (Fe not valued) Like you, I resist authority and being told what to do. (Se not valued) Like you, I do not function well in social situations. (Fe not valued) Like you, I am extremely analytical and categorical in my approach to everything. (Logic highly valued) Like you, I prefer a structured approach to things. (Rational) Like you, I consider myself practical. (Logical above ethical) However, all of these things are so generic that the same could be said of half a dozen different socionics personality types, and almost every single logical type.

You say that you don't need an emotionally positive environment, but let's not get so swept up in socionics that we forget common sense for a moment. There is no human being, except one that is malfunctioning somehow, who does not react poorly to exposure to negativity. I invite you to study abnormal psychology, and general psychology, not just personality psychology, so that we do not lose touch with the basic facts about the human mind in an attempt to make sense of this theoretical system. It would be absurd to assume that ILIs do not react poorly to being mistreated, for example, or that ILIs do not appreciate positive reinforcement. Although I have met many socionics fanatics who seem to think that they are above the predictions of classical and operant conditioning, as researched by Pavlov, and B.F. Skinner (especially ILIs love to believe this nonsense about themselves), I assure you, it is not true.

Be prepared to drop certain parts of socionics where they are too convoluted to be made sensible, even if it leaves large gaps in the whole model. It is better to simply reject the premises of a theory and challenge the assumptions of the entire system, especially when a simpler explanation will do just as well. It is by doing this that progress is made and the theory is improved. Never distort facts to prove a theory simply because you have invested yourself into understanding that theory. I realize you have invested yourself (already a year and a half you said), and that is dangerous to do because now it easily becomes a sunk-cost fallacy to tell yourself that you should continue to dig deeper instead of making adjustments or just abandoning the entire enterprise. Be very self-aware when it comes to this cognitive bias, as it is a deadly trap from which you will not escape if you ignore it, which will totally corrupt your understanding of the whole system - and in turn, that corruption will then spread to other systems as you begin to form connections with this one based on what you thought you knew for certain. One mistake at the foundation, and the entire mountain you build falls apart one day, and you will desperately fight to keep it from doing so because by then it becomes your life's work.

So many people have already fallen into that trap on this website and others, so just be careful. Take my advice and just say "this is good enough" and study other systems. Then maybe eventually you can come back to this one down the road when you are wiser and older and know more about the world in general.
 

tchudak

New member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
137
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yeah, I wasn't questioning your type. But those might be traits that are common to both ILI and LII, because I certainly have all of them, but I'm definitely not ILI.

For one thing, I'm way more agreeable and open-minded than ILI's tend to be. For me, intuition alone is not sufficient grounds to act confident. You have to earn it by doing the hard work of properly conceptualizing it as a rational argument - and even then, once you start to try and do that you quickly realize the futility of doing so, as the laws of reason, when followed dogmatically, make it incredibly hard to draw absolute conclusions about anything other than categorical definitions. An intuition on the other-hand is merely a suggestion, a possibility, not a signpost indicating the proper direction to be heading in. That tends to be the biggest difference between LII and ILI I've noticed. I use intuitions to pull myself up by the bootstraps and come up with new ideas when I need them, but they don't give me a feeling of conviction about them, instead, that feeling comes from knowing, "I have followed the ordered rules of logic that permit me to feel confident that I have spoken impeccably and without error."

But, all the stuff you listed, as you might now see, are things an LII would probably identify with as well, since we're not so different from ILIs, except in the more subtle realm of functions. We share the same feelings and attitudes in general, are annoyed by the same things, enjoy the same things, are critical and demanding about the same things, but for different reasons, and we have a different approach.

My Ni is quite high, it's by far my most strong function, which may differ from you. I'm quite N-oriented in almost everything I do. I just know how to act in many different situations and I'm almost never wrong. I can see the patterns and underlying reasons quickly and then proceed to action with a fairly amount of confidence, and I strongly think this is due to my intuition.
I consider myself to be open-minded, at least more than the average ILI. On the other hand, I'm definitely not very agreeable, which causes some conflicts in my human interactions.

Yes, I can see your point and you may be right.
 

tchudak

New member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
137
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
From the perspective of an ILI, knowledge without a purpose is a waste of time, yes.

So that also helps to clarify you are probably not an ILI. ILIs are interested in knowledge because they want to apply it and make use of it. LII are more interested in knowledge for the sake of it, for the pure satisfaction of knowing, because the more knowledge they possess, the larger their logical framework becomes with which to explain all the aspects of reality.

I disagree with you at some extent in this. I like to gain knowledge, in many different fields and many times it seems, to an outsider, that I am only doing this for the sake of knowing, learning without much application, just for the fun. But in reality, I think everything I learn can be put to good purpose in something at some point, as aleatory the subject may be. So, many times I find myself studying and learning things that seem "useless" but I feel quite confident that I'm going to use that knowledge at some point in my life.
What I agree is, when the OP says they just want to know for the sake of knowing, it sounds that the OP doesn't care much about the application, which would not be quite ILI. But, at the same time, OP also says that it would be a waste of time posting here if it was not for knowing their type so perhaps the OP is like me, they want to understand it know knowing that, if not right now, one day this knowledge will be put to some good use. All in all, self knowledge is a powerful tool and can be fairly useful.
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I disagree with you at some extent in this. I like to gain knowledge, in many different fields and many times it seems, to an outsider, that I am only doing this for the sake of knowing, learning without much application, just for the fun. But in reality, I think everything I learn can be put to good purpose in something at some point, as aleatory the subject may be. So, many times I find myself studying and learning things that seem "useless" but I feel quite confident that I'm going to use that knowledge at some point in my life.
What I agree is, when the OP says they just want to know for the sake of knowing, it sounds that the OP doesn't care much about the application, which would not be quite ILI. But, at the same time, OP also says that it would be a waste of time posting here if it was not for knowing their type so perhaps the OP is like me, they want to understand it know knowing that, if not right now, one day this knowledge will be put to some good use. All in all, self knowledge is a powerful tool and can be fairly useful.

Well true, it does feel good to know stuff, and one gains a sense of confidence from it and maybe self-esteem, but here you also point out that you leave room for the possibility that at some point you might use the knowledge in your life. For the most part I'm the same, but often I will study a topic that I know has absolutely no application in my life, like for example cosmology or quantum mechanics or something like this, purely because I just find theoretical science interesting. I'm not sure if you also do the same thing, and if so, well I could also be wrong and that might be another area of overlap between ILI and LII. I really do feel these two types in particular have a great deal in common, even though they have very different cognitive function ordering and dichotomy preferences. I sympathize with the OP, I also had a hard time figuring out my own sociotype. It took me years in fact and I used to think I was an ILI for quite some time.
 

tchudak

New member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
137
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well true, it does feel good to know stuff, and one gains a sense of confidence from it and maybe self-esteem, but here you also point out that you leave room for the possibility that at some point you might use the knowledge in your life. For the most part I'm the same, but often I will study a topic that I know has absolutely no application in my life, like for example cosmology or quantum mechanics or something like this, purely because I just find theoretical science interesting. I'm not sure if you also do the same thing, and if so, well I could also be wrong and that might be another area of overlap between ILI and LII. I really do feel these two types in particular have a great deal in common, even though they have very different cognitive function ordering and dichotomy preferences. I sympathize with the OP, I also had a hard time figuring out my own sociotype. It took me years in fact and I used to think I was an ILI for quite some time.

I also appreciate and study quantum subjects (mostly quantum physics though), but mainly because I like to work on my own theories. Of course, they are just theories but they help me understanding many non-related things, which I find quite satisfying and attribute to my strong intuition and readiness to form correlations between things that may seem completely unrelated to everyone else. For example, I'm passionated about astronomy and I don't think it's just theoretical material that I'm not going to use, I see this as a understanding of the world, and the more I know about our universe, the more I feel able to act with confidence in things I believe to be true.
Going back to quantics, for example, if I spend my time reading quantum material, then I formulate my own theories and after that I find myself looking at things and how it affects the whole function of the world and how I could benefit from the knowledge I gained.
lol that may even be seem a bit crazy because we are talking about quantum but that's how I work.
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I also appreciate and study quantum subjects (mostly quantum physics though), but mainly because I like to work on my own theories. Of course, they are just theories but they help me understanding many non-related things, which I find quite satisfying and attribute to my strong intuition and readiness to form correlations between things that may seem completely unrelated to everyone else. For example, I'm passionated about astronomy and I don't think it's just theoretical material that I'm not going to use, I see this as a understanding of the world, and the more I know about our universe, the more I feel able to act with confidence in things I believe to be true.
Going back to quantics, for example, if I spend my time reading quantum material, then I formulate my own theories and after that I find myself looking at things and how it affects the whole function of the world and how I could benefit from the knowledge I gained.
lol that may even be seem a bit crazy because we are talking about quantum but that's how I work.

Perhaps that is the key difference between Ti and Ni lead then. We both take an interest in theory, but as you say, you are sorting through information in order to find things that are useful to your theories in order to further your understanding of the world. My approach is slightly different. I also take an interest in theory, but I am always scanning it for logical inconsistencies and systematic errors of reasoning that show cognitive biases or fallacies or weak evidence leading to weak arguments. Every new bit of information I encounter goes through this filter and is given a "rank" you might say, and placed into a hierarchy, where I decide first of all if it is valid, and second of all, how probable it is to be true. My understanding of the world is actually weakened by doing this most of the time, because as it turns out, most of the assumptions that people take for granted are irrational. As a result, I am actually increasing the overall ignorance of myself and other people, because I am showing them the inconsistencies in their conclusions. It is a deconstruction of knowledge, breaking things down into elements, then eliminating the irrational (which tends to be almost everything if you go deep enough).

What you describe yourself doing sounds much more constructive and productive than what I do. You study theories, perhaps emphasis is placed on theories that seem useful even if only in an abstract sense, and you apply them to build something - new theories, new systems, better than before. It is like you are the engineer, drafting up new things and designing new systems, whereas I'm a cranky professor grading people's papers all day.
 

tchudak

New member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
137
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Perhaps that is the key difference between Ti and Ni lead then. We both take an interest in theory, but as you say, you are sorting through information in order to find things that are useful to your theories in order to further your understanding of the world. My approach is slightly different. I also take an interest in theory, but I am always scanning it for logical inconsistencies and systematic errors of reasoning that show cognitive biases or fallacies or weak evidence leading to weak arguments. Every new bit of information I encounter goes through this filter and is given a "rank" you might say, and placed into a hierarchy, where I decide first of all if it is valid, and second of all, how probable it is to be true. My understanding of the world is actually weakened by doing this most of the time, because as it turns out, most of the assumptions that people take for granted are irrational. As a result, I am actually increasing the overall ignorance of myself and other people, because I am showing them the inconsistencies in their conclusions. It is a deconstruction of knowledge, breaking things down into elements, then eliminating the irrational (which tends to be almost everything if you go deep enough).

What you describe yourself doing sounds much more constructive and productive than what I do. You study theories, perhaps emphasis is placed on theories that seem useful even if only in an abstract sense, and you apply them to build something - new theories, new systems, better than before. It is like you are the engineer, drafting up new things and designing new systems, whereas I'm a cranky professor grading people's papers all day.

That was a quite interesting read, Straylight. It was especially satisfying because we share few interesses in common but, as you said, our ways and reasons for connecting to them are completely different.
The Ni vs Ti factor if quite fascinating. On the surface, we are just people who share a things in common but in reality we have completely different ways to approach life in general.
What I find relevant to state that I, just like you, love to spot inconsistencies and contradictions in everything, which makes me more skeptical and uninterested in people and more focused on my inner world of ideas and theories. I have that "I could save the world" mindset but the more I learn about it, the more I think it's worthless. I still try to understand everything but that's for my own sake, because I want to succeed in things I find important.
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
I also don't like parties, and I have no interest in things that I have no interest in. (Fe not valued) Like you, I resist authority and being told what to do. (Se not valued) Like you, I do not function well in social situations. (Fe not valued) Like you, I am extremely analytical and categorical in my approach to everything. (Logic highly valued) Like you, I prefer a structured approach to things. (Rational) Like you, I consider myself practical. (Logical above ethical) However, all of these things are so generic that the same could be said of half a dozen different socionics personality types, and almost every single logical type.

You say that you don't need an emotionally positive environment, but let's not get so swept up in socionics that we forget common sense for a moment. There is no human being, except one that is malfunctioning somehow, who does not react poorly to exposure to negativity. I invite you to study abnormal psychology, and general psychology, not just personality psychology, so that we do not lose touch with the basic facts about the human mind in an attempt to make sense of this theoretical system. It would be absurd to assume that ILIs do not react poorly to being mistreated, for example, or that ILIs do not appreciate positive reinforcement. Although I have met many socionics fanatics who seem to think that they are above the predictions of classical and operant conditioning, as researched by Pavlov, and B.F. Skinner (especially ILIs love to believe this nonsense about themselves), I assure you, it is not true.

Be prepared to drop certain parts of socionics where they are too convoluted to be made sensible, even if it leaves large gaps in the whole model. It is better to simply reject the premises of a theory and challenge the assumptions of the entire system, especially when a simpler explanation will do just as well. It is by doing this that progress is made and the theory is improved. Never distort facts to prove a theory simply because you have invested yourself into understanding that theory. I realize you have invested yourself (already a year and a half you said), and that is dangerous to do because now it easily becomes a sunk-cost fallacy to tell yourself that you should continue to dig deeper instead of making adjustments or just abandoning the entire enterprise. Be very self-aware when it comes to this cognitive bias, as it is a deadly trap from which you will not escape if you ignore it, which will totally corrupt your understanding of the whole system - and in turn, that corruption will then spread to other systems as you begin to form connections with this one based on what you thought you knew for certain. One mistake at the foundation, and the entire mountain you build falls apart one day, and you will desperately fight to keep it from doing so because by then it becomes your life's work.

So many people have already fallen into that trap on this website and others, so just be careful. Take my advice and just say "this is good enough" and study other systems. Then maybe eventually you can come back to this one down the road when you are wiser and older and know more about the world in general.

How can you type yourself as LII when you affirm that you don't value Fe? It's your suggestive function and it should be the one you seek to make your Ti/Fe axis stronger. You're right about not considering some overly-complicated Socionics aspects (such as Reinin dichotomies, I hate those) but functions are the basis. You can't just ignore them. Also, I don't think that being practical depends on Logical/Ethical only and Te is way more practical than Ti so, if you consider yourself practical, you may even be not an LII.

What I'm trying to say is that it's ok not to go deeper and deeper (which you pointed out to be even dangerous) but that it's also important not to neglect too many core information, which may lead you to mistype.
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
ILIs cannot stand incompetence in other people and have a very low tolerance for it. Also, because they truly do not care at all what other people think or feel about them, they are not concerned with whether being critical of others would put them in a bad spot or not.

In my questionnaire this is exactly what I wrote:

"I like to work with people that do what should be done. I can’t stand incompetence, inaccuracy and distraction.";
"I don’t care about others’ thoughts on me and my actions.".

ILI belongs to "irrational" which is the exact opposite of all these things: they are usually late, they start things but don't finish them, people see them as lazy or drifting from one thing to another frequently, they are more spontaneous and do not plan things in exact detail, nor do they stick to plans very well as they tend to constantly adjust and change things along the way, often ending up somewhere totally different from where they wanted to be at first.

I think this is completely wrong for ILIs. ILI's leading functions is Ni aka Time. Punctuality is one of their main traits, most of the times arriving early at meetings.
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
How can you type yourself as LII when you affirm that you don't value Fe? It's your suggestive function and it should be the one you seek to make your Ti/Fe axis stronger. You're right about not considering some overly-complicated Socionics aspects (such as Reinin dichotomies, I hate those) but functions are the basis. You can't just ignore them. Also, I don't think that being practical depends on Logical/Ethical only and Te is way more practical than Ti so, if you consider yourself practical, you may even be not an LII.

What I'm trying to say is that it's ok not to go deeper and deeper (which you pointed out to be even dangerous) but that it's also important not to neglect too many core information, which may lead you to mistype.

You need to be willing to reject anything and completely redesign the entire system if empirical evidence contradicts the predictions and descriptions of the system.

You're already showing the signs of a person who tends not to realize how subtle the differences are between two different types. It is never night-and-day. Emphasis is given to particular characteristics in order to characterize slight difference not extreme ones. At the end of the day, everyone is a human being, first. And second, there are many influences outside of personality that weigh on a person's cognitive patterns. Do not presume to elevate personality to some kind of Theory of Everything when it comes to explanatory power. It is totally inappropriate for you to ignore the core information of psychology itself, before you challenge me for ignoring the presumptions of a fringe theory.
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
You need to be willing to reject anything and completely redesign the entire system if empirical evidence contradicts the predictions and descriptions of the system.

You're already showing the signs of a person who tends not to realize how subtle the differences are between two different types. It is never night-and-day. Emphasis is given to particular characteristics in order to characterize slight difference not extreme ones. At the end of the day, everyone is a human being, first. And second, there are many influences outside of personality that weigh on a person's cognitive patterns. Do not presume to elevate personality to some kind of Theory of Everything when it comes to explanatory power. It is totally inappropriate for you to ignore the core information of psychology itself, before you challenge me for ignoring the presumptions of a fringe theory.

Wait. We were talking about Socionics, right? Who said that Socionics is the "Theory of Everything"? You can't blame me just because I was pointing out a mistake. You can understand even the whole world of psychology (better than me, this is sure) but as long as you're wrong about something related to Socionics you cannot reject my corrections. What's the point of ignoring the functions in a theory based on the functions? Also, I'm really astonished by your diagnosis of me being a "person who tends not to realize how subtle the differences are between two different types". You're exaggerating this concept so much that I should feel like affected by a mental illness or something. Is this what you mean?
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5

I read it. I don't know. I might be rational as you suggested. But I could be an ILI-Te (rational subtype) as well.

Maybe it can be helpful to explain it better: I do make plans. For example I think "ok, today I'm going to study this number of page" but I rarely do what I had planned before. This is why I wrote "I don't like structure but I need it". It's like it helps me to feel safe. But then, when I have finally understood that there will be no problem for finishing a task on time, I don't need that structure anymore.

My friends say I'm quite adaptable and flexible. I tend to disagree with them because I don't always feel good in a constantly changing environment. But in the end I realize I'm much more comfortable than them all. Another practical example. Last month, due to a mistake in the exam planning, my school advised our class that we would have taken our Geography exam in just 5 days instead of 40, as established. There was panic everywhere, everybody was going crazy, me too. We had to study a whole book in a few hours. I don't know why, it turned out to be easy. It took me just 3 days, while others had to cheat during the whole exam session. I hope I wrote it in a decent way.

Even now, I should be studying art, according to my plans. But I'm not. To summarize: "I make plans, it's just that I don't follow them".
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Wait. We were talking about Socionics, right? Who said that Socionics is the "Theory of Everything"? You can't blame me just because I was pointing out a mistake. You can understand even the whole world of psychology (better than me, this is sure) but as long as you're wrong about something related to Socionics you cannot reject my corrections. What's the point of ignoring the functions in a theory based on the functions? Also, I'm really astonished by your diagnosis of me being a "person who tends not to realize how subtle the differences are between two different types". You're exaggerating this concept so much that I should feel like affected by a mental illness or something. Is this what you mean?

I'm not sure why you're being so defensive about this. All I said was, be open-minded and critical. Demand rigorous explanation and falsifiable evidence. Socionics is barely a theory. It's a framework of speculations held together by handfuls of case examples drawn from a mostly eastern european sample base. There's no problem with rejecting fundamental premises, and by rejecting a few that doesn't mean I don't understand the system or that everything I have to say is wrong.

For example, if the type description of an LII or ILI or whatever else gives a certain assignment of functions, and explains why it has to be these functions, in this order, and so on and so forth, you can throw any of that out the window at the drop of a hat. None of it is explicitly true, and only implicit because of the "rules" of the model. The model can be entirely wrong. For example, are you telling me that Socionics is so stone-cut and objectively indisputable that exceptions to a given standard type can't exist? Yeah, right. That's not how reality works, especially not in a soft-science like psychology.

No matter who composes what, or thinks up whatever, you need to be prepared to dispute everything and re-write things. Being "correct" is not a matter of conforming to the rules and laws of an ordered system. Being correct means you are correct as a point of fact. In my case, about my type for instance, I am an LII in every way, except that I tend not to always value Fe. Most of the time, I don't value Fe. So we have to ask, why does that happen? What explains this deviation from the standard? You want to leap straight to a mistype. To me that shows a lack of maturity - it is an extreme and uncalled for leap of logic. There are all kinds of more common sense explanations. For example, it could merely be circumstantial. Do you know me? Do you know the details of my life on a daily basis? No. It requires some reflection and honest analysis, and as it turns out, after years of doing this sort of thing, I can come up with quite a few possibilities that would all be perfectly valid explanations, in addition to being a mistype.

And that is all that I've done in this thread. I've suggested a possibility, given my interpretation of what you had to say so far. I'm truly sorry that figuring out your own type is so hard for you, even after over a year of research. If it is any consolation, I began my research in 2009, when I first joined Personality Cafe, another website very similar to this one and perhaps a bit more popular at this point. I retired from there over a year ago, but I was active in the community and contributed many useful threads. I've spent 8 years studying Socionics and MBTI and Enneagram and Big 5 and MMPI and various personality systems, in addition to minoring in cognitive psychology at university. In fact, my major is computer science with a concentration in machine learning, and most of my graduate work involves research into the features of AGI, one of which is how personality develops.

I'm not saying that makes me an expert or an authority, but it's just to show that I've probably read the same books as you and my analysis draws from the same things you've read, so if we disagree, it is probably not a matter of one person being right and the other being wrong, but rather, the topic we are discussing (psychology) is sufficiently "soft" and subjective for there to be many different points of view. To be fair, my approach is extremely rigorous and scientifically demanding, so I don't buy into the assumptions of this system very much, thus I am very critical of it and make many personal adjustments to what I consider to make more sense, and be more in-line with generally accepted psychological facts. And as a result, I do tend to "break the rules" of the system, but this does not mean I am wrong about your type. It means I don't see type as rigidly conforming with the expectations of the system as such.
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
I'm not sure why you're being so defensive about this. All I said was, be open-minded and critical. Demand rigorous explanation and falsifiable evidence. Socionics is barely a theory. It's a framework of speculations held together by handfuls of case examples drawn from a mostly eastern european sample base. There's no problem with rejecting fundamental premises, and by rejecting a few that doesn't mean I don't understand the system or that everything I have to say is wrong.

For example, if the type description of an LII or ILI or whatever else gives a certain assignment of functions, and explains why it has to be these functions, in this order, and so on and so forth, you can throw any of that out the window at the drop of a hat. None of it is explicitly true, and only implicit because of the "rules" of the model. The model can be entirely wrong. For example, are you telling me that Socionics is so stone-cut and objectively indisputable that exceptions to a given standard type can't exist? Yeah, right. That's not how reality works, especially not in a soft-science like psychology.

No matter who composes what, or thinks up whatever, you need to be prepared to dispute everything and re-write things. Being "correct" is not a matter of conforming to the rules and laws of an ordered system. Being correct means you are correct as a point of fact. In my case, about my type for instance, I am an LII in every way, except that I tend not to always value Fe. Most of the time, I don't value Fe. So we have to ask, why does that happen? What explains this deviation from the standard? You want to leap straight to a mistype. To me that shows a lack of maturity - it is an extreme and uncalled for leap of logic. There are all kinds of more common sense explanations. For example, it could merely be circumstantial. Do you know me? Do you know the details of my life on a daily basis? No. It requires some reflection and honest analysis, and as it turns out, after years of doing this sort of thing, I can come up with quite a few possibilities that would all be perfectly valid explanations, in addition to being a mistype.

And that is all that I've done in this thread. I've suggested a possibility, given my interpretation of what you had to say so far. I'm truly sorry that figuring out your own type is so hard for you, even after over a year of research. If it is any consolation, I began my research in 2009, when I first joined Personality Cafe, another website very similar to this one and perhaps a bit more popular at this point. I retired from there over a year ago, but I was active in the community and contributed many useful threads. I've spent 8 years studying Socionics and MBTI and Enneagram and Big 5 and MMPI and various personality systems, in addition to minoring in cognitive psychology at university. In fact, my major is computer science with a concentration in machine learning, and most of my graduate work involves research into the features of AGI, one of which is how personality develops.

I'm not saying that makes me an expert or an authority, but it's just to show that I've probably read the same books as you and my analysis draws from the same things you've read, so if we disagree, it is probably not a matter of one person being right and the other being wrong, but rather, the topic we are discussing (psychology) is sufficiently "soft" and subjective for there to be many different points of view. To be fair, my approach is extremely rigorous and scientifically demanding, so I don't buy into the assumptions of this system very much, thus I am very critical of it and make many personal adjustments to what I consider to make more sense, and be more in-line with generally accepted psychological facts. And as a result, I do tend to "break the rules" of the system, but this does not mean I am wrong about your type. It means I don't see type as rigidly conforming with the expectations of the system as such.

Ok, I've finally understood your points here. You're right. Maybe I'm too strict when it comes to consider Socionics rules/information. So, can I ask you (besides what you've already written) what makes you think I'm an LII. I feel like I always need more information. Since you are an LII yourself, it would be great if you shared your thoughts abut what we have in common, at least on a superficial level. ;)
 

Straylight

New member
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Ok, I've finally understood your points here. You're right. Maybe I'm too strict when it comes to consider Socionics rules/information. So, can I ask you (besides what you've already written) what makes you think I'm an LII. I feel like I always need more information. Since you are an LII yourself, it would be great if you shared your thoughts abut what we have in common, at least on a superficial level. ;)

I am glad that we can come to terms. I am sorry if I sounded rude at any point or caused offense. I understand how frustrating it can be to be uncertain of your type. As I said, I was uncertain for many years. It is a difficult subject, with a great deal of room for different possibilities due to the subjectivity of the system.

I believe you could be either an ILI or a LII. At least, I am fairly certain you are one of these two types. I lean towards LII because the overall tone of your OP seems LII. You used the term "analytical" many times, as well as "mathematics", both of these are typically associated with favoring Ti. However, there are discrepancies. You pointed out a few, for example when you quoted me and mentioned that you can't stand incompetence and you don't care what people think about you. It is true, these show you do not value Fe very much if at all, and might value Te as a creative function. There is the possibility of this leading to an ILI type conclusion.

Some people responded with very good observations about your feelings as shown in your OP. There seemed to be a consensus for ILI as a type conclusion, and that may be the way to go for now. I confess, I am not good at reading people's feelings or understanding their emotions, and you would be the best judge of your own feelings anyway. It is simply in my nature to always play devil's advocate for contrarian opinions, whenever I see everyone agreeing on a specific thing. I like to consider every point of view, and deconstruct a conclusion by analysis into only what is explicitly true, followed by what is implicitly true given the explicit facts, and then typically this leaves room for a variety of possible interpretations of the data, and as a result, I cannot come to any conclusion. Thus, I abstain from most topics.

Perhaps the above paragraph is also helpful to you in understanding what type you might be? If you find you have the same approach, you could be an LII like me. You can see how, because I am so rigorous in my analysis and logic, my standards are so demanding that I cannot form a conclusion, and thus, my expressive function/creative function is to offer up many possibilities and suggestions, and to encourage further investigation. This is how I was able to finally decide on my own type being LII (Ti lead, Ne creative).

If instead, you find that you tend to express only your opinions and conclusions, and you are drawn to create decisive final answers to things, you can see how that would indicate your creative function is Te - especially if you like those conclusions to be practical, competent, and based on solid facts. Especially if you tend see many possibilities, but keep them private to yourself rather than offering them up for consideration, you can perhaps see how that might show a lead Ni function, because your intuitive perspective is kept introverted.

I do not know you very well so it is up to you, but if it were me, I would look at the situation that way, asking myself how I tend to create, and what I tend to create in the world around me. In my personal experience and throughout my study I have found that when taking a function-based approach to understanding a person's type, it is always the first two functions that are the most obvious - and in socionics especially, I find the creative function is probably the most clear indicator of a person's type.
 
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
33
Enneagram
5
I am glad that we can come to terms. I am sorry if I sounded rude at any point or caused offense. I understand how frustrating it can be to be uncertain of your type. As I said, I was uncertain for many years. It is a difficult subject, with a great deal of room for different possibilities due to the subjectivity of the system.

I believe you could be either an ILI or a LII. At least, I am fairly certain you are one of these two types. I lean towards LII because the overall tone of your OP seems LII. You used the term "analytical" many times, as well as "mathematics", both of these are typically associated with favoring Ti. However, there are discrepancies. You pointed out a few, for example when you quoted me and mentioned that you can't stand incompetence and you don't care what people think about you. It is true, these show you do not value Fe very much if at all, and might value Te as a creative function. There is the possibility of this leading to an ILI type conclusion.

Some people responded with very good observations about your feelings as shown in your OP. There seemed to be a consensus for ILI as a type conclusion, and that may be the way to go for now. I confess, I am not good at reading people's feelings or understanding their emotions, and you would be the best judge of your own feelings anyway. It is simply in my nature to always play devil's advocate for contrarian opinions, whenever I see everyone agreeing on a specific thing. I like to consider every point of view, and deconstruct a conclusion by analysis into only what is explicitly true, followed by what is implicitly true given the explicit facts, and then typically this leaves room for a variety of possible interpretations of the data, and as a result, I cannot come to any conclusion. Thus, I abstain from most topics.

Perhaps the above paragraph is also helpful to you in understanding what type you might be? If you find you have the same approach, you could be an LII like me. You can see how, because I am so rigorous in my analysis and logic, my standards are so demanding that I cannot form a conclusion, and thus, my expressive function/creative function is to offer up many possibilities and suggestions, and to encourage further investigation. This is how I was able to finally decide on my own type being LII (Ti lead, Ne creative).

If instead, you find that you tend to express only your opinions and conclusions, and you are drawn to create decisive final answers to things, you can see how that would indicate your creative function is Te - especially if you like those conclusions to be practical, competent, and based on solid facts. Especially if you tend see many possibilities, but keep them private to yourself rather than offering them up for consideration, you can perhaps see how that might show a lead Ni function, because your intuitive perspective is kept introverted.

I do not know you very well so it is up to you, but if it were me, I would look at the situation that way, asking myself how I tend to create, and what I tend to create in the world around me. In my personal experience and throughout my study I have found that when taking a function-based approach to understanding a person's type, it is always the first two functions that are the most obvious - and in socionics especially, I find the creative function is probably the most clear indicator of a person's type.

Thanks. I'll consider it. I think it won't be easy at all. By the way, that's how I like to spend my free time, there will be no problem.
 
Top