Go Back   Socionics Forums > Ramble Mumble

Ramble Mumble Anything goes, but please make an effort to stay positive and keep it socionics related.


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 23/08/2009, 03:31 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default Type Me!

My enneagram
  #2  
Old 24/08/2009, 12:33 AM
king king is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 336
Default

Ok well you're definately Ne/Si valuing and almost certainly logical.
being a nosy git, I may have seen some things written here and there, and I think that in retrospect you do on the whole seem to be more Ti than Te and Fe over Fi valuing

Regarding Ne/Si I wouldn't like to speculate, however if you are Ti ego - well that pretty much answers the Ne/Si thing.

So anyway to sum up, whatever has happened recently should perhaps be explored to it's natural conclusion.

At the same time, trying to type someone just from written posts in my view is pretty irresponsible (and I know that I may have been guilty of this myself)
and that whatever your type is I believe that you have the self knowledge, socionics knowledge and experience to come to correct conclusion yourself.

All the best.

Last edited by king; 24/08/2009 at 12:39 AM.
  #3  
Old 24/08/2009, 12:57 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by king View Post
Regarding Ne/Si I wouldn't like to speculate, however if you are Ti ego - well that pretty much answers the Ne/Si thing.
Well, ego is pretty much totally out of the question for the Cyclops. It's quite amazing to see that so many people are brainwashed over and over again on these forums.
  #4  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:16 AM
Kanerou's Avatar
Kanerou Kanerou is offline
Omnomnom
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
My enneagram
*looks at those who have replied and points upward*
__________________
http://www.formspring.me/ryeneastraelis Ask away. Naturally, I reserve the right to ignore or delete questions.
  #5  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:27 AM
RSV3's Avatar
RSV3 RSV3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 558
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
Well, ego is pretty much totally out of the question for the Cyclops.
Sorry to continue the OT discussion, but I have to agree with this.
__________________
Sociotype.com

Increased expression of one function (1) suppresses the opposing intradichotomy function and (2) suppresses the opposing intrablock function (and vise versa).
  #6  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:35 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanerou View Post
*looks at those who have replied and points upward*
Here are the correlations between Socionics and the Enneagram. As you can see it's very easy to determine the Enneagram type if you know your socionic type.

1s: leading
2s: leading
3s: leading
4s: INFx
5s: creative
6s: leading
7s: leading
8s: leading
9s: creative

An ISTp can choose between 5 or 9. It doesn't matter which he chooses since neither fits very well. There's no natural home for the ISTp in the Enneagram.

An INFj could fit either 4 or 6 depending on whether its intuition or its IJ temperament is most accentuated. An INFp might also feel more comfortable with 4 or 9 depending on temperament. (The 9 is the most clearly accentuated IP temperament type in the Enneagram.)

The other types has no choice, really. But it's not that important, since the Enneagram is a false theory in its essence.
  #7  
Old 24/08/2009, 03:06 AM
king king is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 336
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
Well, ego is pretty much totally out of the question for the Cyclops. It's quite amazing to see that so many people are brainwashed over and over again on these forums.
I have certainly not been brainwashed. I have started the discussion. I am aware of the differences between Te and Ti and certainly in real life am fairly confident in identifying the different ego types. However it is true that sometimes I do have some difficulty spotting how each one manifests itself within an individual, particularly when I do not personally know that person.

I chose a starting point of Ti ego for a reason -a reason that I intend to keep to myself for now- however as this is a new thread I would be interested in hearing you opinion on Cyclops' rational ego function and a brief summary supporting that arguement.
  #8  
Old 24/08/2009, 08:36 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by king View Post
I have certainly not been brainwashed.
I didn't really intend to imply that you are brainwashed. But Cyclops is currently deluded, since he has convinced himself that he is an INTj, which he definitely is not. That only implies that your analysis is wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by king
I am aware of the differences between Te and Ti and certainly in real life am fairly confident in identifying the different ego types. However it is true that sometimes I do have some difficulty spotting how each one manifests itself within an individual, particularly when I do not personally know that person.
If you take a look at, for example, this little excerpt from Cyclops recent self-analysis ...

"I think the Ti is quite apparent, and it's a strength, it's pretty much what I do without thinking; [...] what I am doing is formulating a system of understanding, a logic of relationships (), in regards to how I am evaluating the interelations of the "objects" in play in the situation. To compare and contrast and influence the system and logical interplay between "objects", or the logics of the people involved, what they say and how it correlates from a static systemic representation.

I don't really (think) I use Te, it seems, what you could say i'm doing is that I analyse the information that's there, the "facts", how they logically relate to each other to see if they make sense or contradict."

... you will see that it strongly suggests that he is not a leading type.

Quote:
Originally Posted by king
I chose a starting point of Ti ego for a reason -a reason that I intend to keep to myself for now- however as this is a new thread I would be interested in hearing you opinion on Cyclops' rational ego function and a brief summary supporting that arguement.
Cyclops is clearly a ego type. Just look at some of his posts on this forum. Look at how he argues. His style of writing, and his style of arguing is typically in nature. The bolded parts in the quote above is as creative as anything can be (though some people on forums like this one, perhaps even the majority, will probably say that it is -- but it isn't).
  #9  
Old 24/08/2009, 09:24 AM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanerou View Post
*looks at those who have replied and points upward*
Thank you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
I didn't really intend to imply that you are brainwashed. But Cyclops is currently deluded, since he has convinced himself that he is an INTj, which he definitely is not. That only implies that your analysis is wrong.
OK, if i'm deluded, please correct/save me. Of course I think you won't expect me to change back to ISTp just on your say so. I mean, you yourself haven't changed your type on the basis of others say so. It's taken a lot of time for me to come round to INTj!!

Quote:
If you take a look at, for example, this little excerpt from Cyclops recent self-analysis ...

"I think the Ti is quite apparent, and it's a strength, it's pretty much what I do without thinking; [...] what I am doing is formulating a system of understanding, a logic of relationships (), in regards to how I am evaluating the interelations of the "objects" in play in the situation. To compare and contrast and influence the system and logical interplay between "objects", or the logics of the people involved, what they say and how it correlates from a static systemic representation.

I don't really (think) I use Te, it seems, what you could say i'm doing is that I analyse the information that's there, the "facts", how they logically relate to each other to see if they make sense or contradict."

... you will see that it strongly suggests that he is not a leading type.
How? I'm analysing my approach to things. Do you thnk my definition of is wrong?

Quote:
Cyclops is clearly a ego type. Just look at some of his posts on this forum. Look at how he argues. His style of writing, and his style of arguing is typically in nature. The bolded parts in the quote above is as creative as anything can be (though some people on forums like this one, perhaps even the majority, will probably say that it is -- but it isn't).
Something else re the bolded part, I went in and edited it after posting it and worded it that way (ie I don't think) so as to make it look like I was still open to the possibility of being another type, it was after all a discussion thread (on another forum), your point is therefore more so irrelevant? But, i'm not sure how *trying* to remain open to debate indicates a Te in the ego, surely more a Ti, if one struggles not to rely on ones own system building?

Furthermore, if you think i'm using Te, please, could you explain how i'm using it. There's been plenty users who have explained that i'm using Ti - socionics Ti, and I struggle not to agree with them.

For instance, here is a good example in a post by user strrrng.

(I WOULD RECOMMEND ANYONE TO READ THIS POST, IT'S ALSO SORT OF AMUSING GIVEN HIS Fe DELIVERY IN HIS INFp WAY)

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...6-post350.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by strrrng
I don't think you're ISTp, Cyclops. Aside from the utter enjoyment I got out of reading the insightful words of another person who has been seeing the exact same things as me all along in this thread, I simply find your way of formulating ideas and sizing people up a bit too familiar for it to be delta. Yes, I know, this sounds like another case of "omg he's like me, therefore he's in my quadra!" but it's really more of a commonality I see going on between me, you, gilly, mimosa -- and I think it relates to Ti/Fe. I have thoroughly enjoyed the way you seem to effortlessly sum up, collate, contrast, whatever, the basic things going on with peoples' behavior. And this isn't the first time I've seen you do it. You seem to come in after having formulated a fairly coherent view of a situation, and proceed to explicate on the logical interplay of said thing. It always registers very naturally to me, which is a sign that we share at least one IE pair, and imo it is the T/F axis (which is more about comparison, structural interpretation, etc.). Taking the Fe sequential intentions I have been calling out in Diana's behavior and seeing them structured in a self-contained idea is very reassuring -- that is essentially how I see Ti/Fe working, Fe following all the causal processes in peoples' actions/motivations/emotions, and Ti establishing underlying structural integrity to give coherence to those very processes' bases. Anyway, you've succinctly pointed out all the blatant contradictions in her bitchy behavior without getting too emotional, which I like.
General note: This was a pretty major thread about suicide, which resulted in two users Diana and Expat deciding to leave the forum. A large part of which came about from my logics of relations that I built up (which I think I used on the thread, as opposed to Te which is a logic of actions)
  #10  
Old 24/08/2009, 10:18 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
Do you think my definition of is wrong?
You haven't defined the concept , at least not here, so I can't tell whether your "definition" is right or wrong. But that is irrelevant. What is much more relevant is that your understanding of is wrong. You obviously interpret what is actually as .

Many others make the same mistake as you on these forums. And the fault is Socionics's. The understanding of what really is is very poor, at least among those who have mistyped themselves and others as INTjs. A similar problem can be seen among ego types, who very often don't understand very well. And since most "definitions" and explanations of the functions in Socionics are written from a and perspective rather than a or perspective, people will continue to mistype themselves based on those "definitions".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
But, i'm not sure how *trying* to remain open to debate indicates a Te in the ego, surely more a Ti, if one struggles not to rely on ones own system building?
If I understand correctly what you are trying to say here, you are wrong at all points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Furthermore, if you think i'm using Te, please, could you explain how i'm using it. There's been plenty users who have explained that i'm using Ti - socionics Ti, and I struggle not to agree with them.
All of those users you are referring to, that have explained to you that you are using , are wrong. They don't understand .

strrrngs's analysis is worthless, but it is a rather typical example of the kind of crap that is the usual result of people's subjective functional analyses, which inevitably lead to almost totally random results.
  #11  
Old 24/08/2009, 11:26 AM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
You haven't defined the concept , at least not here, so I can't tell whether your "definition" is right or wrong. But that is irrelevant. What is much more relevant is that your understanding of is wrong. You obviously interpret what is actually as .
Why is my understanding of wrong, is basically logically evaluating interrelations of objective static reality, or the world of objects. That's what I do, I take people, information, points of view, "facts" and I determine which of these are correct or incorrect in terms of how they relate to each other. I set my knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others. I did it all the way through that thread of suicide, and it's something I do naturally (and shows should the situation arise that I decide to display it verbally.)

To highlight a part of my above paragraph: I set my knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others.

Which is indeed also what *you* do, seeing as you've seen it fit to discuss my socionic type on an enneagram thread, I see it only fit to point out that all you've done here is demonstrate Ti and Ti and Ti, and this is what you're doing, is it not? I set my knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others. Do you think that's Te?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
Many others make the same mistake as you on these forums. And the fault is Socionics's. The understanding of what really is is very poor, at least among those who have mistyped themselves and others as INTjs. A similar problem can be seen among ego types, who very often don't understand very well. And since most "definitions" and explanations of the functions in Socionics are written from a and perspective rather than a or perspective, people will continue to mistype themselves based on those "definitions".
This is quite ironic considering that I have asked you in the past to describe both and and you've told me you can't do it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
If I understand correctly what you are trying to say here, you are wrong at all points.
Can you demonstrate this factually?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
All of those users you are referring to, that have explained to you that you are using , are wrong. They don't understand .
pfff, then explain it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
strrrngs's analysis is worthless, but it is a rather typical example of the kind of crap that is the usual result of people's subjective functional analyses, which inevitably lead to almost totally random results.
It may be crap, but you saying it's crap doesn't make it crap, unless you *explain* how it's crap, then if it makes sense my understanding should change. Re strrrng: he's HA, and he often finds my posts soothing and give a logical set up to his dynamic , which he often finds re-assuring. If I was using then he wouldn't find my posts like this. Also: my set up of the interplay between people on the thread was not dynamic, as it is I had a static construction of how everything was related, and I expounded on this static interplay, and it's something I do often.


----------------------------

Other users who think i'm Fe seeking

Numbers (ENFj)
Bionicgoat (ISFp)
JuJu - ENFj, i'm the only "ISTp" he finds gives insights he enjoys.

THOSE WHO TYPE ME AS INTj INDEPENDENTLY on WIKI:

Missuttii
Ashton
Kamangar
Strrrng
Niffweed

There may be more but I can't remember.

Those who are sure of my Ti leading: Hotel Ambush (INTj), and leans towards INTj for me.

Last edited by Cyclops; 24/08/2009 at 11:33 AM.
  #12  
Old 24/08/2009, 12:51 PM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
Why is my understanding of wrong, is basically logically evaluating interrelations of objective static reality, or the world of objects.
To see the world as a world of objects is, in its essence, to have an external view of reality, and, furthermore, to view it as objectively existing. That is .

A world view is more focused on the interrelations themselves. An extreme version of would be to deny that objects exist as independent entities, to see them instead as "constructions", and to see reality itself as emanating from the subject. A typical philosophical manifestation of is phenomenology, and what is commonly referred to as process philosophy does also express a mainly based world outlook.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
That's what I do, I take people, information, points of view, "facts" and I determine which of these are correct or incorrect in terms of how they relate to each other.
Yes, you start with the facts, with objective information which you accept as "given" and without any particular need for subjective interpretation. And you evaluate the information (as if every piece of information was an "object"), by external criteria in an external perspective. You try to make the pieces of information -- which you gather, not from within your own subjective consciousness but from the outside world -- , the objective data, fit into a coherent logical whole. And that's .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
I set my knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others.
Typically creative .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Which is indeed also what *you* do, seeing as you've seen it fit to discuss my socionic type on an enneagram thread, I see it only fit to point out that all you've done here is demonstrate Ti and Ti and Ti, and this is what you're doing, is it not? I set my knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others. Do you think that's Te?
It is definitely Te, creative to be more precise. Some accepting types do not always understand that this is in fact too, because they (for example Expat) see only as it manifests itself in their own behaviour and attitudes.

And of course it is what I do myself; I have never denied that. But it is not and it will never be , no matter how many times some incompetent fools on some idiotic forum proclaim it to be .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
This is quite ironic considering that I have asked you in the past to describe both and and you've told me you can't do it.
You should not try to describe it in terms of definitions. You should try to understand it by looking at its manifestations in various types of behaviour and attitudes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Can you demonstrate this factually?
No. I see it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
pfff, then explain it.
No. Try instead to understand it by looking in the directions I am pointing out to you. Try to see what it is. (But in order to really do that, you must have a correct understanding of what a typical representative of each type is, and that of course requires, among other things, that you have typed yourself correctly.)
  #13  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:04 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Important quotes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclops
I set my knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
Typically creative Te
Prom, i'll try to address the rest of your points later, but this I feel is fundamental (and my initial "feeling" in terms of subjectively how the "objects" relate in regards to the rest of your post). Is that you are showing a lack of understanding of what is.

For instance, this setting knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others is pretty much a direct quotation from Ashura herself, on her works on the socion. I can only conclude that your knowledge of the functions is therefore quite possibly faulty.

Furthermore, at the risk of showing my hand too early (although in fairness it's only one of them), i'm going to hyposit that what you are doing in this thread (and others) is comparing your own knowledge of patterns and laws from a subjective stance of the objects. The subjective stance is your own. And with that, you would base your knowledge of socionics, functions on the basis of you being unquestionably an INTp, and therefore you build your arguments around what you see fits into that framework.

To support this, what you are basically saying is in contradiction to what Ashura wrote herself. A type wouldn't make such assessments. And you are basing the "argument", on your own understanding of how the objects relate to each other from your own basis of patters and laws

So, I hyposit that it could well be faulty to discuss socionics with you, since you appear to not be basing your understanding on what socionics is - and that's what the old lady in Lithuania has to say about it; ... it's probably a little of "something else".

----------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Promtheus
No. Try instead to understand it by looking in the directions I am pointing out to you. Try to see what it is. (But in order to really do that, you must have a correct understanding of what a typical representative of each type is, and that of course requires, among other things, that you have typed yourself correctly.)
It's also possible to have an incorrect awareness of oneself. I would think that a type would be able to type people better in this instance, because they will still use the objective facts on others. Of course, it could be said that a type would base it more so on themselves. However, for myself, I feel that it's probably a bit of both, some typing i've got wrong, others I haven't, hmmm.

However, I think me being Ti/Fe does put into a new perspective some of my real life relationships with for instance, ESTj's and ISFp's. (and yes, some of them pretty much are from what I observe textbook examples of these types, hmmm).

Hmmmm. (lol at me making this post, perhaps for personal reasons, heh).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Can you demonstrate this factually?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
No. I see it.
I'll say, hmmm to this just now, but it does seem to tie in with above reasoning, at least in relation to yourself. :/

Last edited by Cyclops; 24/08/2009 at 01:14 PM.
  #14  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:13 PM
RSV3's Avatar
RSV3 RSV3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 558
Default

I vote SLI for Cyclops, but that's all I'm going to say on the matter (hopefully).
__________________
Sociotype.com

Increased expression of one function (1) suppresses the opposing intradichotomy function and (2) suppresses the opposing intrablock function (and vise versa).
  #15  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:17 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RSV3 View Post
I vote SLI for Cyclops, but that's all I'm going to say on the matter (hopefully).
Well, amusingly, I never thought a type would be "forced" on a person on this forum.

You are entitled to your opinion, just that it's most likely wrong, and ... unless you decide to discuss otherwise (you already said on chatbox yesterday that your opinion on my type would never change...or at least words to those effects), what's the point in this post?

You've already said this, above:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
Well, ego is pretty much totally out of the question for the Cyclops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan
Sorry to continue the OT discussion, but I have to agree with this.

Last edited by Cyclops; 24/08/2009 at 01:23 PM.
  #16  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:31 PM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
House Robot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
Prom, i'll try to address the rest of your points later, but this I feel is fundamental (and my initial "feeling" in terms of subjectively how the "objects" relate in regards to the rest of your post). Is that you are showing a lack of understanding of what is.
I don't understand it as well as I would like to, but undeniably I understand much better than you or any other non- ego type on these forum does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
For instance, this setting knowledge of patterns and laws in opposition to others is pretty much a direct quotation from Ashura herself, on her works on the socion. I can only conclude that your knowledge of the functions is therefore quite possibly faulty.
You interpret what you read in light of your own faulty understanding of your own type and what you can observe in yourself, and you simply don't seem to understand that a ego and a creative type exhibit many similarities in outward behaviour that yet have totally different origins. You read some words, but you haven't really studied the types in real life, so you don't know what you read actually refers to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Furthermore, at the risk of showing my hand too early (although in fairness it's only one of them), i'm going to hyposit that what you are doing in this thread (and others) is comparing your own knowledge of patterns and laws from a subjective stance of the objects. The subjective stance is your own. And with that, you would base your knowledge of socionics, functions on the basis of you being unquestionably an INTp, and therefore you build your arguments around what you see fits into that framework.
In contrast to you, I have studied the real types for years now. It's actually quite boring to discuss these elementary aspects with beginners like you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
To support this, what you are basically saying is in contradiction to what Ashura wrote herself.
Only in your subjective interpretation of what she meant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
So, I hyposit that it could well be faulty to discuss socionics with you, since you appear to not be basing your understanding on what socionics is - and that's what the old lady in Lithuania has to say about it; ... it's probably a little of "something else".
If you prefer to live in ignorance, that's up to you. I couldn't care less if you understand anything of this or not. I am only occasionally responding in threads like this one in a (probably futile) attempt to prevent newcomers from being brainwashed like so many others have been through the years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
It's also possible to have an incorrect awareness of oneself. I would think that a type would be able to type people better in this instance, because they will still use the objective facts on others. Of course, it could be said that a type would base it more so on themselves. However, for myself, I feel that it's probably a bit of both, some typing i've got wrong, others I haven't, hmmm.
So far I have made fewer typing mistakes than almost any other socionist on the forums and elsewhere (not counting those who don't have any views at all)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
However, I think me being Ti/Fe does put into a new perspective some of my real life relationships with for instance, ESTj's and ISFp's. (and yes, some of them pretty much are from what I observe textbook examples of these types, hmmm).
Another example of an analysis with absolute zero value.
  #17  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:36 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Your empty rhetoric holds no bearing in the world of "science" of socionics, i'm not even sure if playing verbal tonsil tennis is going to be fun, sorry.

I may come back later and read what you've wrote (but it seems you can't or won't see the dissection of what you say when it's before you), but in meantime i've unfortunately got a shedload of work to get through. Laters my perhaps battle-stubborned friend
  #18  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:38 PM
RSV3's Avatar
RSV3 RSV3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 558
Default

... ...
__________________
Sociotype.com

Increased expression of one function (1) suppresses the opposing intradichotomy function and (2) suppresses the opposing intrablock function (and vise versa).
  #19  
Old 24/08/2009, 01:42 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RSV3 View Post
... ...
Indeed, popcorn value is what i'm looking for, lol.
  #20  
Old 24/08/2009, 03:02 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
Your empty rhetoric holds no bearing in the world of "science" of socionics, i'm not even sure if playing verbal tonsil tennis is going to be fun, sorry.

I may come back later and read what you've wrote (but it seems you can't or won't see the dissection of what you say when it's before you), but in meantime i've unfortunately got a shedload of work to get through. Laters my perhaps battle-stubborned friend
I read, and wish to change the bolded part to respond :P


----------------------------------------

OK, I almost forgot to take a shower this morning, i'm pretty sure this points to Si HA.

Last week, I went for a McDonalds. Apparently you get a free glass with your diet coke. I couldn't decide what colour I wanted so I asked the girl who was serving me to choose it for me. She gave me a pink one.

Another attendent put my fries on my tray, and I didn't know what they were at first.


------------------------------

About a fortnight ago, I was out with a friend. Some guy asked me for some money, but I thought he was selling something. I'd no idea wth was going on, and I said, "No thanks mate, i'm OK".

Apparently this was amusing to my friend, as I didn't realise what the guy was doing.

I think this proves without question my disconnect from reality.

Last edited by Cyclops; 24/08/2009 at 03:04 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2007 SOCIONICS.COM