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 20/03/2010, 05:15 PM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENTroP View Post
Disrespect for that which has brought the world so much cannot exist on a logical basis. Skepticism is the core of the scientific method, and the only thing that keeps one from accepting anything and everything, based on somebody elses testimony. Also, disliking and finding "despicable" an entire group of people, based on something as vague and common as atheism also implies a nonlogic mediated process. I would never say that I find all theists despicable, as that which I find despicable has to do with actions, not belief systems. I have plenty of theist and atheist friends, and cannot fathom labelling an entire segment of a populace "despicable" on that basis alone. I attribute this, partially, to being L and not E. I analyze the person, not by group or past experience with similar people, but on an individual basis, which is more rational and less emotional. Hence, I type him as an Ethical not a Logical.
Well you put the problem in a way a "sceptic" does, but the problem with them is that they're biased and actually believers in true or false. Take for example the fact that most (if not all) sceptics actually believe anything they could not see but is considered "scientific" but nothing of the fields considered disputable, that's not their opinion, but others'. You don't believe that a dream could predict the future, but you really believe that the atomic model used today actually is what's going on there.

Indeed, besides the fact that it's something we can communicate, things like prediction or magic don't make much logical sense, but what about when you see it? This is the problem with sceptics, if you tell them that you actually saw something they don't even take it into consideration, dismissing anything that is close to some subjects. I personally don't care about other's opinion and I would not categorize these people as "bad" or something, but I used to be like Viscera in my twenties so probably here's where the difference between me an him comes. But to put it straight: these so called "sceptics" are genuinely ignorant.

Let's say I saw something which defied the laws of science, a ghost, anything and I tell this to a sceptic, he would dismiss it as lie, or hallucination (not without a feeling of pride and confidence), or whatever but he doesn't use his "scientific" methods in this case to acknowledge that statistically, as long as I use to base any of my conclusions on logic and my mind never plays me pranks, how the hell happened that it stroke me to tell such thing right now?

Well the problem here is not about believing someone else or not, of course I could lie if I have a plan to test your naivety, for example but the problem is that for these sceptics the kind of phenomenon that I saw is a lie, it is not true and I am judged like this although I saw it. There is no problem with being cautious, I told you that what happened to me I would probably not believe immediately when told to me by someone else, it would matter for me the general impression about that person because I'd like to know if that was really true or false, but I'd never dismiss him/her as an liar, or crazy, or credulous.

So basically these "sceptic" attitude is a proof of ignorance rather than the reverse, they simply fail to acknowledge the possibility of the existence of something true just because they can't understand how that can happen.

I was completely an atheist until some things happened to me to become agnostic. Of course, I have my degree of scepticism as well, religion and named gods I find as fantasies and indeed they most probably considering that they reached us simply by some obscure writings not facts which can be questioned or investigated. I heard people telling me that how can you believe that there's nothing more than this life, or "someone there". Well simply like that, if I'm alone home why should I believe that there's someone else in the house? Unless I see it, of course, if I can't identify who's there, I'll not jump to conclusions (eg. "that must be Jesus") but simply "I saw something/someone".
---

I use to use some terms in two ways: one way between quotes, and another one without. In speech I use accent or recently, that quote sign with my hand. I'm not sure if I've been consistent in the previous message, but here's the meaning:

- non-conformist: someone who's an independent thinker and is not biased by conformity, or "how people do" things, which is probably completely irrelevant to what's he trying to accomplish. "non-conformist" (so between the quotes) is someone who wants to be seen as non-conformist or who's doing things differently on purpose. Although a little subtle, the difference between these two kinds of behaviour is enormous, basically it's very little relationship between the two attitudes. Genuine non-conformism itself drives us to improvement, the "non-conformism" towards consumerism ("let's make a different phone, one with a mouse tail").
And btw, ENTp's are considered "non-conformist" (between the quotes), this is at least the common stereotype, but what most people fail to understand is that this type is like that because of necessity, individuals of this type simply discover that the current methods and explanations don't apply to what they're try to accomplish or understand, they don't simply generate "crazy ideas" in my experience. Preoccupation for this "my personal way" is rather specific to Fi types, especially Irrational - SEE, IEE.

- scientific and "scientific": there's one thing to acknowledge something based on scientific methods and a different thing to invoke something established as "scientific" just because it comes from a known scientist or institution, or politically correct decision about what's "scientific". Take for example the global warming political debates and the scandals generated around it (eg. the one involving the "scientific authority" of the University of East Anglia).

- artist and "artist": people who create works of art by inspiration and people who are involved in it as a profession. For example the requirements of record labels of deadlines to "create and album".

- sceptic and "sceptic": you know this already - people who don't use to believe any oddity without some reasons versus people who assume a non-believing stance and deny any information which is categorized as non-scientific or disputable.

@Viscera: I think you're an ENTp. Let's not waste time, could you please read the descriptions to tell us what you think?
http://www.socionics.com/prof/entp.htm
http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/il.html
http://www.psychotypes.com/don.php

I sent you the links to the ENTp (or ILE (Intuitive-Logical Extrovert), or Don Quixote, or the seeker, etc), but please read all the descriptions because you may find other closer to your personality . Other typings people decided on you were:
- INFp (that's IEI - Intuitive-Ethical Introvert, or Yesenin, etc)
- NF - that's all with "Intuitive" and "Ethical"
- IxI - that's INFp (IEI) or INTp (ILI)

Oh, and there's the website http://wikisocion.org/ which is a very good reference about the theory, even if its descriptions are not all necessarily of good quality, but you can understand a lot of things (especially the psyche structure as seen by Model-A and naming conventions).
Then http://www.socionics.us/ - good general author's explanations, etc.

Last edited by mihai_m; 20/03/2010 at 05:15 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 20/03/2010, 05:49 PM
ENTroP ENTroP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 112
Default

@viscera
How about somebody who just genuinely isn't comfortable accepting things that aren't verifiable? I am very open to these things, but have been disappointed time and time again when asking for proof. I would gladly accept supernatural and theistic approaches if something of that nature manifested itself in my life, but it hasn't yet... If it does, I would be more than happy to change my views. Am I abominable and despicable?

@Mihai
I am a sceptic insofar as I have heard vast and varying degrees of supernatural things testified on a personal level, but not reproduced or shown to me in a way that I can accept it. If I had one of these experiences, I would try to examine it, and if I found my own experience lacking, I would be brave enough to consider the possibility that I am wrong. Black and white thinking is also part of many supernaturalist belief systems, in that they like to make false dichotomies of "if this is not explainable, then it must be this", this is a close minded and simple way of thinking, and shows a discomfort in just not knowing. I am comfortable enough with ambiguity to say, we don't know yet, but it doesn't necessarily warrant a supernatural explanation.

@Viscera
If someone tells me their experience, I accept it as something special to them, but do not necessarily accept it for myself. I think labelling people based on what you *think* they are before even talking to them is narrow minded.

Last edited by ENTroP; 20/03/2010 at 05:49 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 20/03/2010, 05:50 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

I think your description could be anyone, you just sound like a normal enough person who's a bit crazy (and that's normal cause we're all a bit mad).

OK, let's see....

I've heard an INXp talk that way, an INTj (who seemed to have some thoughts related to yourself, although he was "recovering" from a very religious upbringing before the Fi was substituted for his real strength, Ti), and some of maybe even an ISTp.

I could even imagine it being an introverted ENFp.

IMO - if you posted a video it could help.

Or maybe you could talk about your hobbies and fears.

Something else, I would suggest you could try to identify your Hidden Agenda, but like I say, it is just a suggestion which might help, I wouldn't expect miracles.

I get the impression there's going to be a rather speculative dance taking place on the thread! Which, maybe stereotypically, could point to P over J, but, who knows.

But i'm sure the video would help people.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 20/03/2010, 08:45 PM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

@ENTroP: I understand your position, agree with it and I consider myself actually on the same side. But what I see differing is the attitude, the "tone" in your previous posts.

First of all, you perceived Viscera as being a blind believer while I actually perceived him the opposite way. So the only sensible explanation for this situation I can find is that you're a bit inclined for irrational scepticism, while me (and imo Viscera) for irrational suppositions.

So the fact that you were convinced someone who I perceive as investigative and objective as the opposite, a believer - therefore as being an Ethical type - made me think that your position is rather the typical "sceptic's" prejudice.

Basically I have nothing against the stance you describe, but with what happened here, real facts. While I think the idea is the same, I think that it translates differently to different people. Oh, I also think that a part of this is indeed type-related, my likely typing on you is ESTp - this and ENTp have a lot of things in common, especially accepting what can't be proven, btw, you expressed this idea very well "testified on a personal level" - I personally HATE testimonies which try to convince someone of something without a factual basis, lol! So ESTp's and ENTp's are identical considering this aspect - Fi PoLR actually.
---

Now this is exclusively connected to typing: my ISFp girlfriend is a strong and declared atheist and sceptic. I am so frustrated that I can't prove to her things which I experience long ago! She listens and can talk about it, but can't generate ideas on this base (eg. supernatural) and I have a constant feeling that she's rather looking at me as a mother looks to her child - likes what he/she says, is interested, but doesn't really believe or intend to ever take actions based on that.

My brother, ISTp, the same. He was witness to those events!! Can you get it? He know that something supernatural happens, but still, he is absolutely not interested in such things and doesn't want to get involved.
Btw, those things were performing some sort of magic with extremely low odds of happening (calculated for one of them: 1/14600).
For me it is important to make reality checks and this is what I did with an occasion several years later on my brother, maybe my memory was playing me pranks. He admitted that the events truly happened, although when I asked him why isn't he interested he said something like this: "if gods exist, it means that they existed previously, so things won't be better or worse if we acknowledge their existence, that's why I'm not interested".

And he's right! But his problem, imo, is that first of all it's good to know as many details as possible about the subject, then these "forces" or whatever they are can be used actually! Why limit ourself to our materialistic limited ways of doing things? Whatever, I myself had no time to continue my research, but I would do it in the future, for example when my retirement comes.
---

The belief is connected to more than one dichotomy, so Ethics/Logic doesn't tell much, here's how I'd split the 16 types by quadra two-by-two and belief (again, believing in some supernatural things by different reasons, not necessarily conformity or mysticism):
- believers: ENTp, ESFj, INFp, ENFj, INTp, ISFj, INFj, ENFp
- disbelievers: INTj, ISFp, ESTp, ISTj, ESFp, ENTj, ESTj, ISTp

This has nothing to do with the theory, but observations, it would require a lot of discussions to explain what kind of belief/disbelief and reasons for it each type is prone to, and how it manifests.
Little examples: SEEs may appear believers, but they just conform to an opinion, I don't think they genuinely understand spiritual matters. ESEs believe in some sort of the powerful effect of wish and desire. ISFj conform to what other people do, a bit INFj, except that the latter are really interested in unusual things and try to get as much proofs as possible. ENTp make a lot of suppositions and when an explanation doesn't satisfy the evidence will put it on "something else". This evidence can be purely extension to reality because of intuitive associations which makes sense for them but not based on physical events. I find INFp (and to a bit lesser extent INTp) to be the most genuine believers in "something" of all types, although I found INTp's both truly sceptic or really religious. On the opposite side is ISTp and to a lesser extent ISFp - I met actually religious ISFp's although as a rule of thumb they are not interested in spiritual matters. INTj and ESTp want facts, want proves. ENFp are interested more in a sort of thing that matches their personality and expectations, plus they can't dismiss or accept something so easily.

Again, this is more like a general line I figured out, they're not all the same out there.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 21/03/2010, 12:50 AM
Viscera's Avatar
Viscera Viscera is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m View Post
Well you put the problem in a way a "sceptic" does, but the problem with them is that they're biased and actually believers in true or false. Take for example the fact that most (if not all) sceptics actually believe anything they could not see but is considered "scientific" but nothing of the fields considered disputable, that's not their opinion, but others'. You don't believe that a dream could predict the future, but you really believe that the atomic model used today actually is what's going on there....

....

@Viscera: I think you're an ENTp. Let's not waste time, could you please read the descriptions to tell us what you think?
http://www.socionics.com/prof/entp.htm
http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/il.html
http://www.psychotypes.com/don.php

I sent you the links to the ENTp (or ILE (Intuitive-Logical Extrovert), or Don Quixote, or the seeker, etc), but please read all the descriptions because you may find other closer to your personality . Other typings people decided on you were:
- INFp (that's IEI - Intuitive-Ethical Introvert, or Yesenin, etc)
- NF - that's all with "Intuitive" and "Ethical"
- IxI - that's INFp (IEI) or INTp (ILI)
I don't really have any more need to elaborate on my conclusions on the matter of skepticism because you have perfectly done this for me. This seems to demonstrate that we have a similar way of thinking. Many people do not understand my opinions on skepticism. I am glad I am coherent to someone.

As for the type descriptions...

I find the socionics.com descriptions to be the most subjective, especially for the ENTp/ILE type. Like mentioning buttons falling off, interests in UFOs and accidentally breaking pens. These seem like qualities many people I have met have had and seem superficial and mundane. The other profiles were similar. I'll mix together the impressions I got from all of the profiles, just for time's sake:

I felt that the ENFp profiles were relatable to me in that I am often regarded as very charismatic and charming, and can attract people for this reason, but I consider myself more intellectual and less superficial than the profile implied. My kindness and outgoing-ness is more of a front that I create to make people more comfortable. I get a sense for peoples' unease and emotional pain, so I try to make everyone happy. I am exhausted by this though, so often avoid people when I can. This causes problems because one day I am really happy and kind and then the next I am avoiding the group because I just cannot take the drain. This may be what is referred to as the 'psychological distance' issue in the ENTp profile on Socionics.com.

The INFp profiles did not resonate with me at all and I can't recall anything that I could relate to which stood out for me. I actually got a bit of a negative impression of INFps from reading the profiles.

The INTp profiles were similar to me intellectually. I do like to have a sense for the underlying structure and geometry, and have a side interest in math and even numerology; though this interest is more my own than burying my nose in dull text books. I am good at drawing and have always focused on realism and geometric exactness, trying to discover the best method to create realistic images. Growing up my style oddly resembled romantic images from the early 19th century, as though my mind was more interested in the past than the present or future. I don't know why drawing style would relate to INTps, but I just thought I'd mention that.

A lot of the ENTp profiles give the impression that the ENTp is interested in inventing vacuum cleaners or robots, or future-tech things. This is one of the reasons I am turned away by ENTp profiles, though I suspect the profiles simply have the subjective opinions of the authors which contaminate them. I am more drawn toward the past than I am the future, and I get the impression that Ni and not Ne is interested in the past. I could be wrong about that though.

The INTj profiles appeal to me and I can relate to them quite well, except for that maybe I am not as organized as the stereotypical INTj. Honestly, I relate more the the INTj profile than any of the other ones. I feel kind of like a haphazard, effervescent kind of INTj than a mad-scientist inventor ENTp or skeptical lawyer INTp.

Again, I don't feel like I can relate to INFp.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
I think your description could be anyone, you just sound like a normal enough person who's a bit crazy (and that's normal cause we're all a bit mad).

OK, let's see....

I've heard an INXp talk that way, an INTj (who seemed to have some thoughts related to yourself, although he was "recovering" from a very religious upbringing before the Fi was substituted for his real strength, Ti), and some of maybe even an ISTp.

I could even imagine it being an introverted ENFp.

IMO - if you posted a video it could help.

Or maybe you could talk about your hobbies and fears.

Something else, I would suggest you could try to identify your Hidden Agenda, but like I say, it is just a suggestion which might help, I wouldn't expect miracles.

I get the impression there's going to be a rather speculative dance taking place on the thread! Which, maybe stereotypically, could point to P over J, but, who knows.

But i'm sure the video would help people.
Though I am aware how helpful it would be, I would prefer not to post any videos. I am glad to answer any questions though.

I had a very non-religious upbringing and gradually 'discovered' spirituality as I went through adolescence. I would see or hear things, or dream things which led me to search inward, which I think is the only place where spiritual truth can be found. This has a lot to do with what mihai_m mentions in his most recent posts.

So for hobbies I'd say that I am interested in spiritual and consciousness studies, though when I was a kid I was interested in history, especially warfare. I loved to draw and collected flags and military uniforms and such. The eras I was most interested/most 'resonated' with me were the 1830's-1840's and the first quarter of the 20th century. As a kid I was very detailed oriented and would draw battlefields from that time. Obscure eras of transition are interesting to me.

As I grew older I distanced myself from those things. Sometimes I play computer games and am interested in strategy games more than action games. I generally look at computer games as time consuming so prefer to avoid them. Same goes for television and movies, though there are times where I will fall to the temptation.

My fears often involve cruelty of others. I dislike name-calling and being involved in competitive sports, which I always dreaded as a kid. I think that the most fearful things involve other people, who are reckless and dangerous. I prefer sensitive and kind people over people that seek stimulation and rushes and competition. If I am around kind and sensitive people I am very happy and don't fear very many things. I don't like being jealous or being put in situations where people are jealous of me.

I also fear not being married and not finding the right wife. So I suppose I fear
failing romantically. I think marriage/finding a mate is important for a person's development.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENTroP View Post
@viscera
How about somebody who just genuinely isn't comfortable accepting things that aren't verifiable? I am very open to these things, but have been disappointed time and time again when asking for proof. I would gladly accept supernatural and theistic approaches if something of that nature manifested itself in my life, but it hasn't yet... If it does, I would be more than happy to change my views. Am I abominable and despicable?

@Viscera
If someone tells me their experience, I accept it as something special to them, but do not necessarily accept it for myself. I think labelling people based on what you *think* they are before even talking to them is narrow minded.
I understand how my conclusions about skeptical people appears narrow minded. It is a conclusion I have reached by observing people who say that they are skeptics. I must admit that the only way I really comprehended this is by noticing it in myself. People have many conflicting aspects or "programs" in them which are activated in different situations.

I noticed the skeptical program would be activated whenever an issue would come up involving seemingly miraculous or paranormal events. The skeptical mode immediately doubts and denies. The reasons for this are often because of the stigma associated with believing in paranormal things. According to the prevailing scientific winds, such beliefs are held by 'uneducated' and even 'stupid' people. Because of this people go into skeptic mode, so they don't look like the 'idiot' that would believe in such things. They will manufacture theoretical explanations based on current scientific biases. Of course there are other forms of this, but this is the most common manifestation of the 'skeptic' program that I have observed.

I know I made this issue a matter of black and white. I made the word skeptic seem like a bad word, when one could make the argument that skepticism can be useful. I consider the "skeptic" to be a person following a mental program with specific parameters though. There is a difference between a skeptic and an intelligent person with an open-mind. mihai_m already elaborated on this. I think he made clear the difference between the two attitudes.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 21/03/2010, 01:02 AM
Kanerou's Avatar
Kanerou Kanerou is offline
Omnomnom
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,371
Default

Hm... maybe you're Alpha or Delta quadra? That would be one of these:
ESFj
ENTp
ISFp
INTj
ESTj
ENFp
ISTp
INFj

Here's another site to poke around. He has some really good stuff. http://socionics.us/theory.shtml
__________________
http://www.formspring.me/ryeneastraelis Ask away. Naturally, I reserve the right to ignore or delete questions.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 21/03/2010, 02:05 AM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

@Viscera: glad to know that my assumption that I understood you exactly was correct.
---
The descriptions have also some subjective features all over the web, I suppose, one should extract the essential. After your last description, I'm still going with ILE, although SEI seems apparent, then a bit EII and to a lesser extent, LII.

Your description reminds me of an ILE friend, who can't finish his studies because he change his mind (first maths, then history or philosophy, then physics). Does this apply to you as well? Not that my experience, but also I remember that it's implied by the descriptions, a great difference between LII and ILE is that LIIs are very goal-oriented and use to finish studies, work, etc., while ILEs change their interests too often to do something really final and useful, usually.
---

Coincidentally as much as I can say that I am interested in history, I'm interested in the same period, centuries XVIII - XIX. Books/things I liked and lit my imagination: The Invisible Man (this is no 1, btw you can find that 6-part British TV series full on youtube), Jack The Ripper, Jules Verne things, The Hound of Baskerville, Vacher (this was a real French killer, no books I know of but the story itself). I read a criminology book written by a Romanian writer, "In the service of life and truth", with stories about a lot of cases of murder in history (famous or not) and I think it was a great influence for me, it had a focus on this period and late-medieval. Actually I realized recently that the imagery I used to see sometimes (eg. before I get asleep), at least the urban one, is similar in film with what's called "steampunk", but I don't relate to everything in this current.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 21/03/2010, 04:58 AM
Viscera's Avatar
Viscera Viscera is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m View Post
Your description reminds me of an ILE friend, who can't finish his studies because he change his mind (first maths, then history or philosophy, then physics). Does this apply to you as well? Not that my experience, but also I remember that it's implied by the descriptions, a great difference between LII and ILE is that LIIs are very goal-oriented and use to finish studies, work, etc., while ILEs change their interests too often to do something really final and useful, usually.
---
I never went through changing my major(which was experimental psychology), but was not sure of what I wanted to do after school. I felt more like I was being honest with myself than anything else. My approach to life right now is to naturally settle/fall into a career.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m View Post
Coincidentally as much as I can say that I am interested in history, I'm interested in the same period, centuries XVIII - XIX. Books/things I liked and lit my imagination: The Invisible Man (this is no 1, btw you can find that 6-part British TV series full on youtube), Jack The Ripper, Jules Verne things, The Hound of Baskerville, Vacher (this was a real French killer, no books I know of but the story itself). I read a criminology book written by a Romanian writer, "In the service of life and truth", with stories about a lot of cases of murder in history (famous or not) and I think it was a great influence for me, it had a focus on this period and late-medieval. Actually I realized recently that the imagery I used to see sometimes (eg. before I get asleep), at least the urban one, is similar in film with what's called "steampunk", but I don't relate to everything in this current.
Yes, I can relate to the visions/imagery before you go to sleep. I looked into "steampunk" and agree that that is a good word to describe them.

I will consider ENTp as a likely possibility for my type. Reading type descriptions on the internet makes ENTp seem like something different. But then I think back to the old story Don Quixote and how Quixote was possessed by a fascination with earlier times of chivalry. This seems to be a very fundamental part of my personality.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 21/03/2010, 08:49 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

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

@viscera, I don't know what type you are, but I think some N guy, but... I get tired of saying N for people on socionics forums. Actually the types ime are in majority of N with Fe (eg either Alpha or Beta) for socionics internet forums.

And, for some personally observed percentile good odds, you're prolly either INTp, INFp or ENTp.

Still, i'll try to remember to watch your posts and if I can help more so, rather with a definite thought somepoint, I will.

Eh, the non Alpha/Beta types tend to stand out more, generally get more hassle (maybe cause they don't fit in with this enviro).

edit edit edit
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 21/03/2010, 11:42 PM
Viscera's Avatar
Viscera Viscera is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
----------------------------

@viscera, I don't know what type you are, but I think some N guy, but... I get tired of saying N for people on socionics forums. Actually the types ime are in majority of N with Fe (eg either Alpha or Beta) for socionics internet forums.

And, for some personally observed percentile good odds, you're prolly either INTp, INFp or ENTp.

Still, i'll try to remember to watch your posts and if I can help more so, rather with a definite thought somepoint, I will.

Eh, the non Alpha/Beta types tend to stand out more, generally get more hassle (maybe cause they don't fit in with this enviro).

edit edit edit
haha, yes, perhaps I am simply an N dude trying to escape an S world. This type stuff is kind of exhausting and not completely convincing, so though I won't be around too much I may drop in now and again and see what's up.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 22/03/2010, 09:24 PM
ENTroP ENTroP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 112
Default

@ Viscera
Thanks for the clarification, I don't suppose I am a sceptic based on your description, then. Dogmatic, automatic disbelief without analysis and consideration is, to be sure, just as bad as gullibility and blind faith.

@Mihai
I don't think it makes sense to split types based on belief and disbelief. Richard Dawkins, a famous atheist and sceptic, is an ENTp. My best friend is an INTj and, as you predicted, a nonbeliever, but his father is also an INTj and a devout believer in Orthodox Judaism.

I think that belief vs. disbelief is a highly personal thing not related to socionic type, as all the ISFp I know are theists, as opposed to your gf, who is ISFp and an atheist.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 23/03/2010, 01:43 AM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENTroP View Post
@Mihai
I don't think it makes sense to split types based on belief and disbelief. Richard Dawkins, a famous atheist and sceptic, is an ENTp. My best friend is an INTj and, as you predicted, a nonbeliever, but his father is also an INTj and a devout believer in Orthodox Judaism.

I think that belief vs. disbelief is a highly personal thing not related to socionic type, as all the ISFp I know are theists, as opposed to your gf, who is ISFp and an atheist.
I agree, that was just a general inclination in my observations, for discussions. The fact is that it appeared to me that you typed someone as an Ethical because of beliefs, not me.

Anyway, about SEIs, my observations are the opposite than yours: my subjects are either atheists and (more often) non-believers (not interested), I know only one SEI who actually believes in God, and does it strongly. Note that you misunderstood that I generalized for all SEIs based on my girlfriend (this is not the first time someone tells that to me), that was only a detailed example.

Yeah, I know INTj believers as well, lots of them I'd say . They are inherently fundamentally sceptics in general, they don't believe absolutely nothing what's not explainable, but at the same they are pretty conformists and religion can play an important role - meaning they simply take it like that, it's not something to analyse. I don't think someone will ever see an LII in an experimental belief, or investigating other faiths, or doing his/her own, this is just my bet.
An example, a guy I typed as INTj, the creator of SQLite database: Dr Richard Hipp.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 23/03/2010, 10:28 AM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

No one really believes in God, going to church is just a mixture of something to do for some people, and for others a sort of open ended insurance policy, just in case.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 23/03/2010, 12:21 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m
Now this is exclusively connected to typing: my ISFp girlfriend is a strong and declared atheist and sceptic. I am so frustrated that I can't prove to her things which I experience long ago! She listens and can talk about it, but can't generate ideas on this base (eg. supernatural) and I have a constant feeling that she's rather looking at me as a mother looks to her child - likes what he/she says, is interested, but doesn't really believe or intend to ever take actions based on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mihai_m

My brother, ISTp, the same. He was witness to those events!! Can you get it? He know that something supernatural happens, but still, he is absolutely not interested in such things and doesn't want to get involved.
Btw, those things were performing some sort of magic with extremely low odds of happening (calculated for one of them: 1/14600).
For me it is important to make reality checks and this is what I did with an occasion several years later on my brother, maybe my memory was playing me pranks. He admitted that the events truly happened, although when I asked him why isn't he interested he said something like this: "if gods exist, it means that they existed previously, so things won't be better or worse if we acknowledge their existence, that's why I'm not interested".

And he's right! But his problem, imo, is that first of all it's good to know as many details as possible about the subject, then these "forces" or whatever they are can be used actually! Why limit ourself to our materialistic limited ways of doing things? Whatever, I myself had no time to continue my research, but I would do it in the future, for example when my retirement comes.
---
I see you have an interest in the supernatural, perhaps you'd like to resurect this thread:

http://www.socionics.com/forums/show...ghlight=ghosts
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 24/03/2010, 02:41 AM
mihai_m mihai_m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
I see you have an interest in the supernatural, perhaps you'd like to resurect this thread:

http://www.socionics.com/forums/show...ghlight=ghosts
I wrote something, but I don't have much to tell about this subject. I didn't see ghosts so far and also magic or connected effects are something totally different than that, I can't see any connection, at least.

What I believe and I was a witness to is something close to synchronicity.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 27/03/2010, 06:11 AM
felafel's Avatar
felafel felafel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
----------------------------
And, for some personally observed percentile good odds, you're prolly either INTp, INFp or ENTp.
Cy!

@viscera: i would also suggest you look into INTp (perhaps INFp too, but wouldn't think ENTp to be such a great match...) - cheers
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 27/03/2010, 06:49 AM
Kanerou's Avatar
Kanerou Kanerou is offline
Omnomnom
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by felafel View Post
Cy!

@viscera: i would also suggest you look into INTp (perhaps INFp too, but wouldn't think ENTp to be such a great match...) - cheers
After something like this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viscera View Post
My fears often involve cruelty of others. I dislike name-calling and being involved in competitive sports, which I always dreaded as a kid. I think that the most fearful things involve other people, who are reckless and dangerous. I prefer sensitive and kind people over people that seek stimulation and rushes and competition. If I am around kind and sensitive people I am very happy and don't fear very many things. I don't like being jealous or being put in situations where people are jealous of me.
I would think Beta the least likely quadra, Gamma the next least likely.
__________________
http://www.formspring.me/ryeneastraelis Ask away. Naturally, I reserve the right to ignore or delete questions.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 27/03/2010, 12:05 PM
Cyclops Cyclops is offline
Gone on holiday...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by felafel View Post
Cy!

@viscera: i would also suggest you look into INTp (perhaps INFp too, but wouldn't think ENTp to be such a great match...) - cheers
Yo felafel

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanerou View Post
After something like this:



I would think Beta the least likely quadra, Gamma the next least likely.
It's possible - however, i've known plenty INFp's for instance who don't like name calling and such, and plenty ENTj's who are highly competitive and visceral (name pun, ha).

I guess my issue is looking at overall picture rather than just one paragraph as everybody has nuances of personality that can't always be explained by socionics, or at least, quite so obviously as we'd perhaps hope.

Hmmm, but that's another subject i'll prolly get round to discussing with some other people.

@viscera, if you're still around , i'd recommend personally to start of with 4 dichotomies http://www.socionics.com/sta/sta_turbo.html and then perhaps look at your temperament, eg IP, IJ etc.

Although overall you do give the impression of someone who's somewhat main focus is inward - ie an introverted type, although that's just an impression, I suppose this type of writing in the thread you are doing is a form of 'internal' regardless? *shrug*.
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 06:57 AM.


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