Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[SillySapienne]

LOL!!!!!!

 

[Jack Flak]

LOL!!!!!!

Bullshit, you didn't convince me. Lemme see your REAL war face.

Which one's more accurate?

Ethical intuitive extrovert - Wikisocion

Intuitive ethical extrovert - Wikisocion

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Bullshit, you didn't convince me. Lemme see your REAL war face.

Which one's more accurate?

Ethical intuitive extrovert - Wikisocion

Intuitive ethical extrovert - Wikisocion

Huh. I never knew somebody elso took to calling them ethic and logic. Shucks, I had thought of that on my own.

 

[Jack Flak]

Huh. I never knew somebody elso took to calling them ethic and logic. Shucks, I had thought of that on my own.

Try this one on for size:

Intuitive ethical introvert - Wikisocion

 

[Magic Poriferan]

[edit] 1. Introverted intuition
IEIs perceive, process, and produce information concerning trends and patterns over time most intensively. They constantly and inadvertently make judgments, assessments, and assumptions about relationships based on what they see as recurring trends from past behavior. They tend to understand the underlying dynamics of situations, people, etc., but may not be able to readily verbalize these insights since they are so internal and conceptual.

Ehhhh... I'd say this is true enough.

The temporal world of the IEI is vivid and complex. IEI's are very imaginative people who tend to be more mystical and dreamy, thus possibly annoying more practical or "grounded" types. Their gentle demeanor does not cast them as particularly rebellious, but their obscure desires often are a far cry from those of the typical person.

I am not interested in anything "mystical" in any serious sense. Other than that, this paragraph is very accurate. I often feel like I'm living in a dream or simply watching a film. Very disconnected from the sensoral world. And I do seem to be very imaginative. Also true that I have strange tastes but am not rebellious.

Now, it's around this time that the description swerves way off course.

[edit] 2. Extroverted ethics
IEIs apply their understanding of trends of behavior over time to observing, analyzing, and influencing people's moods. They make contact with other people by attempting to influence their emotions positively, which is their way of creating something in themself worthy of being included in interaction.

I'm terrible at influencing peoples' moods the way I want to, and I'm not interested in doing so at least half as often as I am. It is true that I want to give people a positive reaction, but don't we all to some extent? I have higher priorities though, that will motivate me to illicit negative responses from people.

IEIs are comfortable discussing feelings that arise from interaction between people. They are naturals at guessing who has been offended and approaching the person and helping them to let off steam and make amends with the offender. IEIs are typically quick to take the blame for offenses upon themselves in order to show their acceptance and good will towards the other person, and create good attitudes.

I'm not usually comfortable discussing those feelings. This forum is a very different environment and I do not interact here as I would with most people.

I am very bad at guessing peoples' feelings or knowing what to do with someone in a bad mood. That might be the most inaccurate line of the profile. Am I quick to take blame? Sure, if I've done something wrong. But I am very pre-occupied with truth and accountability, so if I don't think I've done something wrong, I am stubborn and often unaplogetic in defending myself. Also, if I think myself and someone else have done something wrong, but they've done something worse, you can bet I'm going to account for that.

IEIs' speech and voice usually have a certain dramatic affect and depth of feeling, which influence the emotions in the atmosphere; these feelings can be used to generate elation and boisterous laughter. If IEIs prefer, they can also generate and communicate their feelings of sadness and loss. They are adept at communicating depth of feeling. If things seem too quiet and low-key, they may even generate controversy or conflict to liven things up and get people involved once again in a high-spirited atmosphere.

Listen to me on ventrillo. The answer is no.

Also, I really prefer quiet and low-key, would not generate controversy for the hell of it, and am really annoyed by other peoples' tendencies to do that.

The IEI will often say something that sounds very deep and heartfelt, only to immediately realize the ridiculousness of what they are saying, and then make light of it. The IEI does not induce a formal separation between being joking and being serious (like their mirror, the EIE), being less premeditated in expression in their natural state.

I do say things that seem serious and then make light of them. I do often pre-meditate my jokes, however, even if part of the human involves me not letting anyone else formally know that I'm joking.

Overall, I find the description unsatisfactory. When a profile is less convincing than something that relies entirely on the forer effect, something is wrong.

 

[Jack Flak]

I believe you...But I'll be damned if you don't still sound INFP to me. What I know INFP is, based on people I've known very well, in life and on the net. Perhaps someday I'll write a description which doesn't suck.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I'm either ILI or LII. However, there is a vagueness and generality to these descriptions that makes me wonder about their value. What I always dislike is when profiles do not pass the "as oppose to" test. That is, every profile describes a peron in a a way that barely or does not at all conflict with several other descriptions. A person shouldn't find it perfectly feasible to be three different profiles.

 

[Jack Flak]

I'm either ILI or LII. However, there is a vagueness and generality to these descriptions that makes me wonder about their value. What I always dislike is when profiles do not pass the "as oppose to" test. That is, every profile describes a peron in a a way that barely or does not at all conflict with several other descriptions. A person shouldn't find it perfectly feasible to be three different profiles.

Oh, I know. I said they were vague a couple hours ago, even. They're almost useless for determining your type, but they can provide a little insight once you know it.

The best way to determine type in socionics, imo, is using the intertype relations descriptions. Try hard not to read anything into them though and bias yourself.

 

[Orangey]

I'm either ILI or LII. However, there is a vagueness and generality to these descriptions that makes me wonder about their value. What I always dislike is when profiles do not pass the "as oppose to" test. That is, every profile describes a peron in a a way that barely or does not at all conflict with several other descriptions. A person shouldn't find it perfectly feasible to be three different profiles.

Yeah, but then you get profiles that implicitly suggest things like "feelers can't think logically, and thinkers can't feel." I prefer greater nuance and adaptability in the descriptions.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Yeah, but then you get profiles that implicitly suggest things like "feelers can't think logically, and thinkers can't feel." I prefer greater nuance and adaptability in the descriptions.

Nuance does not necessitate a lack of contrastibility, and certainly not vagueness. However it does take someone with a lot of talent to write a truly good series of profiles in that regard.

 

[Jack Flak]

Yeah, but then you get profiles that implicitly suggest things like "feelers can't think logically, and thinkers can't feel." I prefer greater nuance and adaptability in the descriptions.

Nuance does not necessitate a lack of contrastibility, and certainly not vagueness. However it does take someone with a lot of talent to write a truly good series of profiles in that regard.

Many of the popular descriptions beget popular notions that aren't based on reality. Such as that Sensors can't contemplate anything, and Feelers can't use logic. Which itself results in people thinking they can't be the type they actually are. It's a problem.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Many of the popular descriptions beget popular notions that aren't based on reality. Such as that Sensors can't contemplate anything, and Feelers can't use logic. Which itself results in people thinking they can't be the type they actually are. It's a problem.

Well there are too many absolutes there, for one thing. This comes back to one of my main, recurring points. It will be hard to make use of any of this until someone comes up with a clear and consisten means of quantification.

Can we measure use of Feeling? And how much Feeling does someone have to use compared to Thinking in order to be a Feeler?

 

[Orangey]

Nuance does not necessitate a lack of contrastibility, and certainly not vagueness. However it does take someone with a lot of talent to write a truly good series of profiles in that regard.

True, though I do think that profiles that focus on intertype differences, especially when it comes to differences along any of the dichotomies, tend to imply that the differences are more rigid than they actually are IRL.

 

[Jack Flak]

Well there are too many absolutes there, for one thing. This comes back to one of my main, recurring points. It will be hard to make use of any of this until someone comes up with a clear and consisten means of quantification.

Can we measure use of Feeling? And how much Feeling does someone have to use compared to Thinking in order to be a Feeler?

It can be observed...I can't describe it though. The way I like to think of the preferences is of overlapping timelines split into 2/3 and 1/3. So...for an INTP, say...

2/3 time is spent Perceiving (N/S), and 1/3 Judging (T/F)

2/3 of Perceiving time is N, 1/3 is S

2/3 of Judging time is T, 1/3 is F.

It works for me.

 

[Haphazard]

It don't work for me.

"You're a thinker? How the hell does that work?"

"I only use F when I'm at work, I'm T at home and sleeping. "

Yeah...no.

 

[Totenkindly]

CaptainChick might be ENFJ. There is a seeming preference for Feeling over Intuition.

I don't know. She's extroverted, and I see feeling as an underlying motivation, not the one she's primarily working in.

Not like PinkP, or someone else similar, for example.

I'm fine with her running off an extroverted perceptive function.

 

[Falcarius]

GargoylesLegacy: INFJ

 

[Atomic Fiend]

^seconded.

 

[The Ü™]

^ Thirded.

 

[Valiant]

^Fourthed.