Clearly an ISTP.
[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] seems ST, S-dominant. Lots of straight info and data, high investment in metrics and provability (Te). I'm uncertain at this point if this is SeTe or SiTe, but I lean SiTe because of an apparent discomfort with things (information, definitions, etc) not aligning with what is known and previously defined. He also seems to be building a system based from information already available rather than actively seeking out novel information/experience, so SiTe would make sense.
I don't claim to be an expert on function typing, but ST is really all I'm seeing.
S and N dominants have "missing information/missing picture" syndrome and tend to only see half the board. This is not an insult... all types have an equal deficit in some way.
[MENTION=29921]awbro[/MENTION] I think the ISFJ typing fits you better than ENTP from what I've seen from you (although I could easily see ISTJ or INTP with accented Si working for you as well based on our interactions). I only mention this because I see you've retyped as such.
EDIT: "Softned" the message.
I had create 3 different systems of typing, personally I am actually on the 6th but 3 remain in private.
I am the guy swimming against the current.
So that must be Si and Te, right? Super traditional! Well, not really.
Anyway, I dont think we should extend this conversation, because I know you are extending an unhappy conversation that comes from the Sum Typing thread and another part coming from the graveyard. I know you didnt came here to clarify my type - that is super obvious. I rather not even try to figure out your motives here because I fear what they might be.
I have considered it and am actually looking into the possibility currently. Definitions of the functions from mbti to socionics differ to a notable degree. Currently, it's easier to see myself in Ti than Si (as I'm very quick to neglect my personal comfort and socionics Si really gets into the more abstract attentiveness to sensation and having like, deep impressions of things which is something I don't experience at all whereas mbti Si is a bit more watered down and defines a style of thought I guess). I also have difficulty seeing high dimensional Fi (and have considered and been video typed as Fi polR before) because, like Se, how Fi is described in socionics is completely foreign to the way I experience the world. Nonetheless, I know considerably less about socionics than the mbti, so as I get deeper into it I may realize I'm wrong and type as something else (ie. IEI, SEI, maybe even SLE may be alternative possibilities if LII seems incorrect, I just have to get more versed in the theory as I've had very little time with school to do so). People tend to vary on their mbti type and socionics type, but I can definitely see how my variance might be too separated to work. In terms of mbti anyways, I tend to consider myself somewhat of a jumper anyways (ie. With the more fluid stack/what I've heard about objective personality I may be Si-Ti-Other functions rather than truly high/well developed Fe).Hmm, out of the people on this page:
[MENTION=34313]RadicalDoubt[/MENTION] I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am curious as to why you type as ISFJ in MBTI yet LII in Socionics. The main reason I ask of this is because the way you communicate reminds me a lot of Robo/Bismuth's forum posts, have you considered being SEI in Socionics?
I have considered it and am actually looking into the possibility currently. Definitions of the functions from mbti to socionics differ to a notable degree. Currently, it's easier to see myself in Ti than Si (as I'm very quick to neglect my personal comfort and socionics Si really gets into the more abstract attentiveness to sensation and having like, deep impressions of things which is something I don't experience at all whereas mbti Si is a bit more watered down and defines a style of thought I guess). I also have difficulty seeing high dimensional Fi (and have considered and been video typed as Fi polR before) because, like Se, how Fi is described in socionics is completely foreign to the way I experience the world. Nonetheless, I know considerably less about socionics than the mbti, so as I get deeper into it I may realize I'm wrong and type as something else (ie. IEI, SEI, maybe even SLE may be alternative possibilities if LII seems incorrect, I just have to get more versed in the theory as I've had very little time with school to do so). People tend to vary on their mbti type and socionics type, but I can definitely see how my variance might be too separated to work. In terms of mbti anyways, I tend to consider myself somewhat of a jumper anyways (ie. With the more fluid stack/what I've heard about objective personality I may be Si-Ti-Other functions rather than truly high/well developed Fe).
Mistyped it, I meant SLI (with the possibility of Se ignoring being what I was focusing on). By video typing especially, I have been consistently typed as ILE as well (and while I typically relate strongly to the position of Si and Fi in descriptions I have read about those placements, I'm not sure how likely that is since, while individual and quirky out of purely not being aware of things, I don't think I'm as overtly contrarian as Ne in first position implies). I've always been under the impression that I likely value Si and Ne, but something about weak Ni doesn't fit either. I wonder how much of this is influenced by being likely neurodivergent in a specifically sensory processing fashion.Hmm regarding those alternative possibilities, I would say if IEI, SEI and LII are in consideration SLE probably shouldn't be. IEI, SEI and LII all have weak Se in common (LII being Se PoLR, IEI also having 1D Se though duals can often mistype as each other and while SEI has 3D Se, it runs in antithesis to their lead function so Si is always their preferred method of sensing - Se leads would have that in reverse neglecting Si comfort in order to exert their Se pressure). I think either way you value Si/Ne.
To be honest, I have always seen you as having Se in high/prominent position. When you typed as ILI before, I found that really odd and probably incorrect. ILI was suggested for me multiple times, especially when I first got into socionics so I've read about it decently and you really don't seem Fe polR at all. The positioning of Se in that type in particular also seems really off, even with the dominant subtype (I think my initial reaction to interacting with you was SEE, but having met an actual SEE I think that's probably off, specifically looking at where Fi and Fe seem to be positioned. You don't come across Ti polR either I'd probably agree). Reading up on quadra values and such, I think it's very possible that you could be a beta type, most likely EIE or SLE (probably EIE as you seem to relate most to Ni ego descriptions). I can definitely see Si being in a weak/devalued position probably (ie. correct me if I'm wrong, SLE is Si ignoring and EIE is Si polR, correct?). You come across as an extroverted type in socionics at least. if neither of those work, I wouldn't be overtly opposed to LIE. You're most likely the dominant subtype, but you probably already knew that much. To add, I am basing this off both our personal interactions and what I've observed from you both on forums and through video platforms (as I recall looking through your video typing thread back on 16-types back when you and I were both trying to be typed on that platform).Do you have any opinion on my type since I've given a few on yours? In regards to MBTI/Socionics of course, we did have a good discussion about enneagram a while back though. I'm absolutely confident now on valuing Se/Ni but I honestly could see 4 or 5 of those types as fitting, being EIE, LIE, ILI (which I could see in both socionics and their "equivalents" in MBTI) and then in socionics I could also see SLE and SEE tbh (although probably not Ti PoLR, but it's been suggested) - that being said the first 3 are definitely the 3 most likely imo.
Mistyped it, I meant SLI (with the possibility of Se ignoring being what I was focusing on). By video typing especially, I have been consistently typed as ILE as well (and while I typically relate strongly to the position of Si and Fi in descriptions I have read about those placements, I'm not sure how likely that is since, while individual and quirky out of purely not being aware of things, I don't think I'm as overtly contrarian as Ne in first position implies). I've always been under the impression that I likely value Si and Ne, but something about weak Ni doesn't fit either. I wonder how much of this is influenced by being likely neurodivergent in a specifically sensory processing fashion.
To be honest, I have always seen you as having Se in high/prominent position. When you typed as ILI before, I found that really odd and probably incorrect. ILI was suggested for me multiple times, especially when I first got into socionics so I've read about it decently and you really don't seem Fe polR at all. The positioning of Se in that type in particular also seems really off, even with the dominant subtype (I think my initial reaction to interacting with you was SEE, but having met an actual SEE I think that's probably off, specifically looking at where Fi and Fe seem to be positioned. You don't come across Ti polR either I'd probably agree). Reading up on quadra values and such, I think it's very possible that you could be a beta type, most likely EIE or SLE (probably EIE as you seem to relate most to Ni ego descriptions). I can definitely see Si being in a weak/devalued position probably (ie. correct me if I'm wrong, SLE is Si ignoring and EIE is Si polR, correct?). You come across as an extroverted type in socionics at least. if neither of those work, I wouldn't be overtly opposed to LIE. You're most likely the dominant subtype, but you probably already knew that much. To add, I am basing this off both our personal interactions and what I've observed from you both on forums and through video platforms (as I recall looking through your video typing thread back on 16-types back when you and I were both trying to be typed on that platform).
The mbti system has been pissing me off recently so idk how good my input will be here (even though I technically know more about the mbti than socionics). I initially had you pegged as an ESTP, but more realistically I think you have an ENxJ temperament. You tend to type as 385 tritype wise (which I think I agree with so long as it's an 8w7 fix, which I think I've seen you go with before), which tends to be a relatively "dry" (for lack of better words; I mean more in a overtly emotivist sort of way in the sense that it's double competency, you're not boring or librarian in the slightest) and ambiverted, which may be why you've considered intoverted types in the past. I could see either a more disagreeable (in the big 5 sense) ENFJ working or ENTJ. I think I may be partial to ENTJ at this point in time.
self assertive as a 5,
Assertiveness may not be a hallmark of core 5, but individuals who are core 5 can indeed be assertive. I am one of them. This will come from the influences of our other fixes, our stacking, etc. Why we assert ourselves when it seems contrary to our core type will shed more light on our typing overall.Regardless of what type you are, assertiveness is not indicative of being a core 5. 5s are withdrawn, withholding, detached, sensitive, isolating, distanced, live in their heads, guarded, move away from others - not toward others in assertiveness.
Regardless of what type you are, assertiveness is not indicative of being a core 5. 5s are withdrawn, withholding, detached, sensitive, isolating, distanced, live in their heads, guarded, move away from others - not toward others in assertiveness.
Assertiveness may not be a hallmark of core 5, but individuals who are core 5 can indeed be assertive. I am one of them. This will come from the influences of our other fixes, our stacking, etc. Why we assert ourselves when it seems contrary to our core type will shed more light on our typing overall.
Assertiveness may not be a hallmark of core 5, but individuals who are core 5 can indeed be assertive. I am one of them. This will come from the influences of our other fixes, our stacking, etc. Why we assert ourselves when it seems contrary to our core type will shed more light on our typing overall.