Go Back   Socionics Forums > Ramble Mumble

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


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 21/05/2010, 02:35 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,272
Default

Dude the only person I can see as taking things personally here is you.

I don't have an agenda against you.

Maybe you've had too many 'it's all about me cookies' last night, in other words it's some massive Fe HA where you seem to imagine my actions evolving around you.

Quote:
This is what actually I said recently - that example with the red cap - that Fi is everything that is "personal" - expression, opinions, people, etc. Fi is subjective relationships, especially between the self and others. At least by what you say now confirms my typing again, don't you agree? Remember when I said that Fi types are not bothered by being contradicted, or forbidden some things, but by not having their things respected - opinions, style, position - because it's theirs.
Are you not taking this position because I am disagreeing with you? We 'get on fine' when I choose not to disagree with you I noticed.

Quote:
Just consider that ILE/ENTp is Fi-PoLR! They, like ESTp's, don't respect opinions or attitudes of people because they're "theirs", but tell what they think in your face. Ti is good/bad, true/false, correct/incorrect, beautiful/ugly (rarer) - in absolute and objective terms, no matter of how a dismissed thing is valued by someone else.
This is a T thing more than anything. T types are more sluggish when it comes to the consideration of the impact of their words on others due to repressed F.

Quote:
You know that you were one of the people I was getting along well with, although I type you differently for a long time, on the other hand your retaliations to something that I do not consider personal issues change things, this is nothing new for me in dealing with IEEs anyway.
Welllllll as I said I was unaware we'd fallen out.

I'd have thought I could have disagreed with a logical type without them making it personal, I suppose it's more complicated than your little listings of what ESTps, Ti, Fi etc types do, yeah?

Quote:
(I didn't correct the text for mistakes :P - and btw, most of the times I think back and reformulate, or another idea comes, so I delete or copy/paste text often, so maybe it's not that "barbaric" to make the text a compressed patched idea and not trying to make a good-looking literary composition )
You maybe could, you say F doesn't exist, then you imply it does exist, stuff like that's mis-leading and not going to do you any favours if you want to be clear.

How about saying, F is combining the traits that Fi and Fe have in common. Actually I could say that Fi or Fe don't exist because a person can't have one without the other - THAT's socionics (study Model A for a refresher).

Last edited by Cyclops; 21/05/2010 at 02:36 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 21/05/2010, 03:08 PM
SG's Avatar
SG SG is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,502
Default

Seeing that this thread is getting volatile, I want to remind you all to stay away from personal stuff or it will be locked.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 22/05/2010, 07:23 AM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

@SG: ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
Are you not taking this position because I am disagreeing with you? We 'get on fine' when I choose not to disagree with you I noticed.
No, this is just a type-related fact. Fi types are bothered by being dismissed and take things too personally, and in our case - a good study one - contradicting you doesn't mean that I label you or your knowledge, but simply I'm sticking to the facts I know. I'm not aware of most of your typings, but I'm aware about your type, why you have a different opinion - I have no idea, maybe you have a good reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
This is a T thing more than anything. T types are more sluggish when it comes to the consideration of the impact of their words on others due to repressed F.
That is an Ti thing, not a Te one, Te is compatible with Fi and has a different approach. Ti types are compatible with Fi - the basics. Basically "do what you feel like, be who you feel like, as long as the beans flow" - the totally different approach than Ti.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
You maybe could, you say F doesn't exist, then you imply it does exist, stuff like that's mis-leading and not going to do you any favours if you want to be clear.
My opinion is clear as daylight for a long time, though it seems that this is a heated subject lately. Here's my recent post on it: http://www.socionics.com/forums/show...2527#post22527. What I oppose against people like you, Tesla, Prometheus and others you know to oversimplify the theory is to equalize the "F's" and the "T's" without considering the differences. Actually few people can make the difference between Fe and Fi.

F is not a Socionics dichotomy, it is a grouping of functions, namely Fi and Fe - end of story. I don't know what are we arguing about as long as this is what the official reference states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
How about saying, F is combining the traits that Fi and Fe have in common. Actually I could say that Fi or Fe don't exist because a person can't have one without the other - THAT's socionics (study Model A for a refresher).
Ha, this is actually our starting point in this thread: the difference between Fi and Fe! I agree with you that F is combining the two Ethical functions, I also use it in typing, the problem is with people who don't discriminate(*1) between them, the example above - questioning Mudshadow's valuing of Fe is the proof that making the clear difference between these two functions is mandatory. If one can't or doesn't want to distinguish between them, he/she can't tell whether Mudshadow is a Fe or Fi valuer - therefore valid ILE or not. You and Tesla disagreed without making a point against this Fe-related incompatibility I noted.

All types have both Fi and Fe in their psyche, what makes the difference is where they are, especially which is valued and which is subdued.

(*1) - check the dictionary for the primary meaning of this word, most people assume it differently.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 22/05/2010, 11:11 AM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,272
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m View Post
@SG: ok.

No, this is just a type-related fact. Fi types are bothered by being dismissed and take things too personally, and in our case - a good study one - contradicting you doesn't mean that I label you or your knowledge, but simply I'm sticking to the facts I know. I'm not aware of most of your typings, but I'm aware about your type, why you have a different opinion - I have no idea, maybe you have a good reason.
I agree in some cases this is true for Fi types, but ime to varying degrees it can be true of anyone.

Quote:
That is an Ti thing, not a Te one, Te is compatible with Fi and has a different approach. Ti types are compatible with Fi - the basics. Basically "do what you feel like, be who you feel like, as long as the beans flow" - the totally different approach than Ti.
I don't understand this.

Quote:
My opinion is clear as daylight for a long time, though it seems that this is a heated subject lately. Here's my recent post on it: http://www.socionics.com/forums/show...2527#post22527. What I oppose against people like you, Tesla, Prometheus and others you know to oversimplify the theory is to equalize the "F's" and the "T's" without considering the differences. Actually few people can make the difference between Fe and Fi.
I think there are differences, but there are also similarities. I think everyone interested in this typology accepts that part of the dichotomy is expressed more than the other part. However, for myself, sometimes I find it useful to use simply 'F' etc, other times the expressed function is just that obvious.

Quote:
F is not a Socionics dichotomy, it is a grouping of functions, namely Fi and Fe - end of story. I don't know what are we arguing about as long as this is what the official reference states.
F is a dichotomy, the other half is T

Quote:
Ha, this is actually our starting point in this thread: the difference between Fi and Fe! I agree with you that F is combining the two Ethical functions, I also use it in typing, the problem is with people who don't discriminate(*1) between them, the example above - questioning Mudshadow's valuing of Fe is the proof that making the clear difference between these two functions is mandatory. If one can't or doesn't want to distinguish between them, he/she can't tell whether Mudshadow is a Fe or Fi valuer - therefore valid ILE or not. You and Tesla disagreed without making a point against this Fe-related incompatibility I noted.
I think they can be discriminated between, but for myself, it is too early for me to say with certainty that Mudshadow isn't the type she says she is.

I think that:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudshadow
If it were me, I would be weirded out by a sudden appearance of someone at my door (without notice). Because, though we are charming, we tend to be a little standoffish, emotionally. I mean, we just don't like messy drama and stuff, and if I thought I was about to acquire a stalker, or someone who wanted to mire me in all their emotional problems, I'd probably be very wary. But I would still greet you with a smile. The wariness would be inside.

As long as I know it's purely just a desire to be friends/talk, then that's cool. I guess I have to be reassured it's not going to get all messy and awkwaaaard.

Good luck with your new crush!! Rest assured, we ENTPs are not all lying cheaters. I have been 100% faithful to my INTJ husband throughout our marriage.
Can mean many things, not just that she's ENFp.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 22/05/2010, 12:29 PM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
F is a dichotomy, the other half is T

I think they can be discriminated between, but for myself, it is too early for me to say with certainty that Mudshadow isn't the type she says she is.

I think that:

Can mean many things, not just that she's ENFp.
You continue to ramble about "F" and "similarities" where the issue is the differences, between Fe and Fi. Go tell your maths teacher that you want to discuss English.

Bye!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 22/05/2010, 01:03 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,272
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m View Post
You continue to ramble about "F" and "similarities" where the issue is the differences, between Fe and Fi. Go tell your maths teacher that you want to discuss English.

Bye!
There are differences. If someone is Fe then they express Fe over Fi

They are also similar because they are both ethical.

Typing mudshadow and indeed others from 4th 5th and 6th functions is risky business when there are ego functions and dichotomies to work with.

I try to stick with whats observed and speculate less on what is hidden or presumed.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 25/05/2010, 07:27 PM
MDarman's Avatar
MDarman MDarman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
There are differences. If someone is Fe then they express Fe over Fi

They are also similar because they are both ethical.

Typing mudshadow and indeed others from 4th 5th and 6th functions is risky business when there are ego functions and dichotomies to work with.

I try to stick with whats observed and speculate less on what is hidden or presumed.

Recently, I have discovered that the major difference between myself and ESE tend to be that I will take very conscious and active measure not to avoid someone, particularly if I find that my previous disregard of the individual ended badly (as in, the person felt guilty/sad and made me feel that way for not including them in an activity). ESE are secure in that they don't need to overextend to satisfy anyone or go out of their way to call up a person and include them in an activity (this is because as long as they are enjoying themselves, they see no need to include me, for instance); being that we are both ethical types, I find that Fi's like to extend to satisfy others emotionally by including them and need the same in return. This may be an addition to motives/actions/intentions, that one ethical type ignores Fi and the other is an Fi ego block holder.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 26/05/2010, 05:26 AM
sjy sjy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDarman View Post
Recently, I have discovered that the major difference between myself and ESE tend to be that I will take very conscious and active measure not to avoid someone, particularly if I find that my previous disregard of the individual ended badly (as in, the person felt guilty/sad and made me feel that way for not including them in an activity). ESE are secure in that they don't need to overextend to satisfy anyone or go out of their way to call up a person and include them in an activity (this is because as long as they are enjoying themselves, they see no need to include me, for instance); being that we are both ethical types, I find that Fi's like to extend to satisfy others emotionally by including them and need the same in return. This may be an addition to motives/actions/intentions, that one ethical type ignores Fi and the other is an Fi ego block holder.
Here's how I see ESE in this regard:
In my experience they do look like they overextend themselves (to me anyway), in getting their friends together for some social event, but in a very different way and for a very different motivation from Delta NFs.

ESEs want to organize a big huge event and derive great pleasure from seeing everyone have a great time. So they will seem like they overextend themselves in including everyone they know, but they are not doing it necessarily because they feel a personal connection to you. If you can't come they will not overextend themselves to make sure YOU personally come. And as far as I can tell, they dont get personally offended if you dont. But if you come and you're not demonstrating happiness, they will take offense.

Delta NFs (and maybe Gamma SFs) want to get people together who mean a lot to them or who seem like good people they'd like to get to know better, and to reach out as a gesture of friendship. They will feel very disappointed if the person can't come, and will try to reschedule at some point to maintain the connection. If the gesture is scorned or rudely handled in any way, they can feel downright offended. The get together can be one-on-one, or a group but if in a large group there should still be personal attention and interaction for the Delta NF to consider it a success.


I dont agree with the avoiding thing. That might just be how you apply your Fi in some cases. I definitely avoid people sometimes, depending on my mood.

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

Regarding the rest of the discussion in this thread, the comments I have are:

--I agree with mihai about Fe and Fi distinction being crucial in socionics.

--I agree with cyclops about unspecified F being socionically applicable as a distinction from T and as a general realm of "emotions", however it is this sort of terminology that makes the boundaries with MBTI very precarious and could lead to great confusion (especially for beginners).

--As far as my current understanding of the Jungian dichotomies, it seems that the nohari/johari socionics tests which seem to rely on Jung's dichotomies appear to lead to MBTI-like results. So, I'm not a huge fan of typing by Jung's dichotomies. Going by Reinin's dichotomies is a bit too confusing for me, because it's not clear to me how each term is actually manifested in a person and in each type. Perhaps T-types like to go by the dichotomies more. Or perhaps i'll find them more useful once I am more familiar with them. Right now I prefer to get a gestalt feeling of how a person is using the socionics functions, thinking about quadras, etc, and it seems to be working!

--I identify with mihai's description of how he would react to an unannounced visitor, especially when in the middle of something or with thoughts on one's mind. but I also identify with Mudshadow's description of not taking too kindly to an impromptu visit at my home. Perhaps mihai's assertion is Ne-leading related, and Mudshadow's is NeFi-related (i.e. "they showed up unannounced, how rude!")

--I am pretty darned sure cyclops is ISTp. He may come across as ENFp because the same functions are valued in sort of the same way. Like i've said before, when i read ISTp descriptions, sometimes I could SWEAR I'm ISTp. but my degree of manifesting Fi and my terrible ability with (but great enjoyment of) Si speaks otherwise.This dual I know in real life writes the same way I do, phrases things similarly in writing, says things the way I am thinking them, and puts importance in the same things I do. So it's not surprising that an ISTp might be thought of as an ENFp and vice versa, especially online where writing puts some functions on an even playing field and other functions are hidden from view. It's a dual thing, I think.

Last edited by sjy; 26/05/2010 at 05:27 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 02:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2007 SOCIONICS.COM