Smilexian socionics: Si column

[Expat]

The Se people look where there's a gap between people and walk/run through it. I look at people, their direction and and speed of walking and run towards a spot where I know there's going to be a gap when I arrive even when there isn't one now. A difference is that I expect I have superior planning of route while I also tend to get into trouble and do some really artful dodging when people change their direction unexpectedly. Another difference seems to be that people avoid collisions with the Se runner while I avoid collisions when I'm running.

According to this description and your definitions, I'd act more than . However, I would associate that not with but with .

[Smilingeyes]

The Se people look where there's a gap between people and walk/run through it. I look at people, their direction and and speed of walking and run towards a spot where I know there's going to be a gap when I arrive even when there isn't one now. A difference is that I expect I have superior planning of route while I also tend to get into trouble and do some really artful dodging when people change their direction unexpectedly. Another difference seems to be that people avoid collisions with the Se runner while I avoid collisions when I'm running.

According to this description and your definitions, I'd act more than . However, I would associate that not with but with .

Let me guess, you're concentrating on the idea of foretelling an obstacle appearing or disappearing in a given spot? It's not really important for the experience. I'm basically describing running an obstacle course. It's a similar experience to what one can get by going rock climbing. The focus is on imagining and performing a set of actions that will get you through, not on the guessing the environment aspect.

I'd say that Ni could give me information whether there's likely to be a good or a quick path to the top on a given climbing course for example, and even give me a good guess on where to start looking for one but it takes Si to get certainty, to know where the path is and how one is going to use it. Si on the other hand can't help me evaluate whether something is doable at all. It only helps me find the best possible way to attempt it. In extreme cases Si can be motivated by someone telling that something is impossible or dangerous.

To an EJ at least Ni promotes detachment, avoiding risks and avoiding the use of personal resources. Basically I'd never risk my personal safety based on Ni information. Si is the opposite.

Is that similar to your understanding of the functions?

[Reuben]

The stuff you've put up here seems stupendously much more impressing then watching an elephant dance on its hind knees with a spinning banana cake on top its trunk. Of course there comes again the friendly debate on whether the elephant is able to breathe with a spinning cake blocking its nostrils but that's besides the point.

Would you care to describe an ENFp's functions as well as give some practical applications of them?

[Expat]

It's close to my own understanding.

Let me guess, you're concentrating on the idea of foretelling an obstacle appearing or disappearing in a given spot?

Yes.

I'd say that Ni could give me information whether there's likely to be a good or a quick path to the top on a given climbing course for example, and even give me a good guess on where to start looking for one but it takes Si to get certainty, to know where the path is and how one is going to use it.

Ok. I agree.

Si on the other hand can't help me evaluate whether something is doable at all. It only helps me find the best possible way to attempt it. In extreme cases Si can be motivated by someone telling that something is impossible or dangerous.

To an EJ at least Ni promotes detachment, avoiding risks and avoiding the use of personal resources. Basically I'd never risk my personal safety based on Ni information. Si is the opposite.

If you mean that an extreme - zero person could find the best way of doing some physical thing but not realize its actual impossibility, I can see how that would work but I wonder if it could not also be interpreted as . It could be an extreme example of the workings of - duality.

[Smilingeyes]

@Expat: I agree on the similarities between Se and Si and that this is exactly the sort of guidance that Ni gives to Se. Si of course won't accept this guidance, but requires Ne.

@Blueblade: I'm wondering if it's a good thing to be called a loxodont with penis-shaped berries up his nostril. Did you know that a banana is a berry? I read that somewhere.
Anyway, as your request seems to be in answer to my latest scribblings about I need to answer that I can't give a similar description about ENFps as I don't have personal experience of being one. Wouldn't you like to write one instead? Maybe not. Have you read the other descriptions I've written about ENFps? I think there are some in my threads on the gamma forum.
Hmm... still pondering. I could do that, maybe. At the moment it doesn't yet seem worth it. I've written a lot about EPs in comparison to how little i've written about IPs. I've horribly neglected them. I'll make a mental note of it. If there are more demands to that direction it'll probably turn my attention but at the moment I don't feel like it.

[Jonathan]

The way I distinguish between and , for what it's worth, is that to be S you really have to be comfortable focusing on a physical task. If my mind keeps wandering away toward making generalizations and thinking about things, even when I'm trying to focus on the physical task, I figure that I'm not in S mode.

@Smilex...
I agree with you that type isn't as stable as people tend to say it is. However, I still believe that there are differences between momentary type (the type that changes a lot) and overall type, involving some habits that are less conscious and don't change as much. For example, your posts still sound about the same, even if you feel different as you're writing them.

Anyhow, it's interesting that you're seeing yourself as EFj now (if I'm reading this right). I've often thought you remind me of some highly-NT ENFjs I've known, but I didn't say anything. I still don't get any ESFj vibes though.

[Smilingeyes]

The way I distinguish between and , for what it's worth, is that to be S you really have to be comfortable focusing on a physical task. If my mind keeps wandering away toward making generalizations and thinking about things, even when I'm trying to focus on the physical task, I figure that I'm not in S mode.

I don't have any major problems with that.

@Smilex...
I agree with you that type isn't as stable as people tend to say it is. However, I still believe that there are differences between momentary type (the type that changes a lot) and overall type, involving some habits that are less conscious and don't change as much.

Sure.

For example, your posts still sound about the same, even if you feel different as you're writing them.

Doesn't amaze me really, though I think you'd find some differences if you really tried to.

Anyhow, it's interesting that you're seeing yourself as EFj now (if I'm reading this right). I've often thought you remind me of some highly-NT ENFjs I've known, but I didn't say anything. I still don't get any ESFj vibes though.

No. ESTj. Your idea of what I used to be is astute. I used to describe myself as an Ej so Ni that it's a matter of opinion whether I'm ENTj or ENFj. (Though if one was exact one had to pick ENTj) I tend to think of you too as slightly more on the F side, compared to Phaedrus and Dreikin. Doesn't matter really.

[Jonathan]

I tend to think of you too as slightly more on the F side, compared to Phaedrus and Dreikin. Doesn't matter really.

Could be. I've never ruled out being F, although I'm not consciously aware of feelings most of the time (except through music). Do you see me as an F INTp, a T INFp, or (as I suspect) an type where the theory that one's "creative" function must be one thing or the other is flawed?

...or something else?

[dreikin]

@smilingeyes: Would you say that, while type is mutable, a person may have one type that for them is a type of least effort - that is, a type which they have the easiest time getting into the 'groove' of? I think it's possible that this might require a longer time to change than the apparent or currently effective type (several years/decades compared to several days/months, for example).

@Jonathan: Not sure about that - it might depend on subtype. I'm fairly assuredly an N subtype, and find it easiest to, ah, switch around between perception functions - but that could just be a bias. I'll play around with it and see what comes of it.

[Smilingeyes]

I tend to think of you too as slightly more on the F side, compared to Phaedrus and Dreikin. Doesn't matter really.

Could be. I've never ruled out being F, although I'm not consciously aware of feelings most of the time (except through music). Do you see me as an F INTp, a T INFp, or (as I suspect) an type where the theory that one's "creative" function must be one thing or the other is flawed?

...or something else?

Well, I think both 2nd and 4th are creative functions for everyone. I guess the question is only whether Te or Fe is 2nd. I guess one of them would practically always be slightly stronger than the other. In your case as in the case of some others I'd just expect that they're so close that it's difficult, maybe impossible, and quite possibly worthless to "find out" which is which.

@dreikin
I'd say that it's probably far more complex than that. Within a person's daily life there can be certain job situations, certain social relations, certain emotional situations that all force or coax about a change or a stabilization of social actions. It's difficult to approximate how much of a person's social relations are learned habits relating to the situations he's in and how much is natural to the person himself. Habit is always difficult to break. There's layers. One of the most important reasons for me to propone the theory of social-strategy change is that it's practically impossible to tell what social situation is the base-line. When is a person acting in a normal way? So, no, I don't think there's one difficult type to break per person. I think there's situations in which it's difficult to change personality type and there's situations in which it's less difficult, even automatic. And then, it's difficult to resist that change.

But that was nit-picking. Generally I agree with the gist of what you said.

[Smilingeyes]

I'm having an interesting time these days. There are three important INFj people in my life and generally I'm having a wonderful time with them. It's only when they go INTj that I'm having difficulties. INTjs are about as critical of everything as INTps, yet INTjs are generally less interested in the world, have less life experience and have more baseless opinions, so unlike the INTp critique that's usually to the point, they're just mouthing off. I'm slowly learning to let anything they say when in this mode just go. It doesn't really matter, so I can just ignore it. They tend to revert rather quickly to the nice INFj way.

Thing is, I can also see that they can get scared by my non-reaction. Maybe I should start trying to enjoy jumping through hoops for the fun of these adult kids. Yet I'm slightly afraid that this would just encourage them. For the moment I think I'll continue to keep a tight ship and maintain control.

Part of the problem is that I feel I'd probably like going ESFj on them. Yet I don't feel it's appropriate. I've had enough of and I really need to be ESTj for a while. Difficult.

Of the three, my boss is really the best. Funnily enough, of the three, he's the only one with practically no social relations to me yet he's the one whose most trying to take care of me (give good and to me). Having a dual watch your back at work . . . priceless.

[Smilingeyes]

A post I wrote in another thread made me remember an old friend of mine. He's an ISFp of the sensory variety. He's also a punk bass player, a biker at least used to be the editor of a computer magazine. I expect he's doing something similar these days but I haven't been in touch for a criminally long time. He also boxes, fights skinheads whenever he meets them and he's my fencing mate. But he can't dance worth shit.

It was strange. Back when I hanged out with him more I was dominant. I suppose he supervised me, yet whenever we hanged around I felt I was the one who was beating on him. I guess we were competing on who was the nicer guy and I felt like I was losing.

The most remarkable and striking habit the person had was continuous attempts to be kind by being grotesque. He tried to humor people with the most horrifying stories usually including mass murder, vomit and at least three kinds of sexual deviancy. He was tremendously uncertain of himself and I think he tried to turn a serious attempt to make other people feel good and happy into a joke. No, that's not right. He had a very strong personality and he was very sure of himself. He just wasn't sure that he'd ever succeed at anything he tried. So he tried lots of things. He was also the first person to enthusiastically talk to me about Hunter S Thompson.

Yet considering all his strange habits he also had the most conservative values: religion, home, patriotism, male dominance (in a gentlemanly way). And he truelly was the most gentlemanly person I know, and I know many who try to be such. He was the real thing.

He was also an excellent writer. I didn't think he was as good as some said, but he was good. I followed him as he went into journalism, got his first jobs, then became an editor and turned around a failing magazine only to find out that his succesful paper had become a dangerous competitor to a bigger magazine house that decided to buy his publisher only to close it down. That sucked tremendously. It was the best thing he'd done and this was the result. I think he started to study a bit of economics after that.

So why am I talking about him like this? I've gotten a number of PMs, every now and then, from people that hardly write on this forum. They've been pretty similar. All from ISFps, asking me advice on their personal problems, job choosing and similar things. I don't think I've been as helpful as I could have been as I think ISFp is the type of which I have the least experience. And now I'm feeling very energetic, so I can write about this, even if I'm not certain that it will benefit anyone.

Maybe I owed it to myself. Maybe I owed it to my friend. Maybe I just felt like writing.

[Smilingeyes]

A friend pm'ed me a short while ago. He mentioned something about me having stereotypical views about types. I think it might have been directed at my comments about ESTjs and SWAT teams. I feel I need to fix what I said previously.

No. Every ESTj is not an assassin or a secret agent. No, no, no. I used those examples because I generally feel that STs are about using force, one way or another. And there are certain organizations that have ways of using force that are immediately recognizable. What's different between an ESTj and the betas is that ESTjs don't compete (except with themselves). Neither do they taunt, threaten, torment, play with you, raise hell or fight. An ESTj (at least I do) prefers to arrive unexpectedly, do the job and fade into the night. No questions, no hoo-haa, no bullshit. Just business.

The difference with ISTps would be that ESTjs, even when they are, don't feel succesful, and they generally don't glorify in it. It's ok to spend a moment resting now and then, maybe watch a sunset or a half hour of kids playing in the park, but there's no similar long-lasting calm or harmony that Si gives to the ISTps.

One of the most important things to an ESTj is freedom to work in peace. This is extremely important in relation to the difference between ENFps and INFjs. ENFps interact more. INFjs know when to step aside. They comment before you start and after you're done, but they don't provide a running commentary. And that's important. It's very not smart to stand in the way when an ESTj is working. An ESTj hates to redo things, but if the INFj wants so, he generally will. He'll seethe a bit, but he'll get over it.

Another thing is that the ESTj requires someone to tell him directly what's expected from him. This is information that the INFj communicates well. This too is key.

The third important thing is that on some level the ESTj loves an audience.

An ENFp's Ne is much more involved. In relation to ISTps, the ENFp is the intense one, the busy-body. This is something the ESTj appreciates in the ENFp. There's a feeling of kindred spirit, at least from the ESTjs side, yet there's also some wonderment. The ESTj is a loner. He doesn't really understand the ENFp's superior social aspect. He'd prefer to just nod appreciatively from a far away.

In relation to the ISTp, there's little to say. The ESTj appreciates the no-bull-shit attitude. He also appreciates the capabilities of the ISTp though he feels the ISTp could use them a bit more, get his hands dirty more often.

The above is concentrated on the sensory aspects of the ESTj as that's the way I'm feeling right now.

[Smilingeyes]

I found out lately that when I concentrate on the Si part of me, I often end up having a flow experience. I'm having to wonder if this is normal for EJs.

If I pick up Csikszentmihalyi's definition of flow and it's requirements I get

1. Clear goals (expectations and rules are discernable).

Something resulting from Thinking, if clear is subtituted by concrete we get an easier understanding of the connection to sensorics.

2. Concentrating and focusing, a high degree of concentration on a limited field of attention (a person engaged in the activity will have the opportunity to focus and to delve deeply into it).

(introvert function)

3. A loss of the feeling of self-consciousness, the merging of action and awareness.

(introversion)

4. Distorted sense of time - our subjective experience of time is altered.

(disappearance of Ni?)

5. Direct and immediate feedback (successes and failures in the course of the activity are apparent, so that behavior can be adjusted as needed).

(sensory)

6. Balance between ability level and challenge (the activity is neither too easy nor too difficult).

(not type related?)

7. A sense of personal control over the situation or activity.

(ST or just sensory connection?)

8. The activity is intrinsically rewarding, so there is an effortlessness of action.

(does it require anything but a pure functional state, which is always rewarding?)

Looks really Si to me.

...
...
...
...


And jumping to another subject entirely, I felt I had to finally let go and perk up my INFj gal who had gone all INTj on me. Damn. I don't feel I'm ready to start doing ESFj things. But she was in such a bad mood I more or less felt I had to. What sucks about being an ESTj is that it's damn hard to stop oneself from doing some things if the situation seems to require it, even if you know the outcome is not going to be any good. Yes, I fucked up, she didn't get much better from my attempts at Si+Fe. It still didn't end quite that badly, but the situation left me pissed off and doubting myself. Never fun.

[Smilingeyes]

Oi, the thread's been buried, but I shall make it arise again. Arise, my pet, arise!

I've been doing a number of work projects recently, but from the beginning of next month I'm starting a new work gig. I'm going back to patient-oriented work and I'm going to do it out in the boonies. That's right, I'm going to tend a small village in the middle of nowhere where people still think that when your abdomen swells twice its size and becomes rock hard, you've just got indigestion. Ooh yeah. So, why then? My boss suggested this particular job for me and arranged it. And I thought he liked me! Naw, he does. And I like this particular job ... I think. At least I wanted it. Why? First there's the money. The locale is desperate to get a doctor -> cash. Thank you. The second is that we'll be starting a new screening program in the area and I'll be doing it -> research material and valuable experience. And the third reason is that I've produced so much research material that it'll take my boss about a year to write his part of the articles in which we report this stuff. Meaning... I killed my job So what does that mean? Well, I won't be doing my job sitting in front of this computer from November on...

If there's something you want to ask me for some reason, it'll get a whole lot trickier soon. Not that I think that I'll be abandoning this forum completely. It's so comfy.

[meatburger]

The ENFp admires the ESTj's intelligence, energy and confidence.

When my ESTj friend is around i dont feel stupid because hes a really intelligent guy and he talks to me as if im on the level with him.

[flower]

ESTj's seem to have a strong sense of their direction in life, they seem to know what they want, what they are doing next and what they are working towards.

I admire and envy this.

[Smilingeyes]

ESTj's seem to have a strong sense of their direction in life, they seem to know what they want, what they are doing next and what they are working towards.

I admire and envy this.

I don't know what I want or want to do. But I've got a very clear idea about what I'm going to do. ...

It's very confusing to hear a self-confessed ISTp talk about envy (but the nature of the issue envied clarifies it somewhat).

Socionists tend to call ESTp the most realist group. In my opinion they're confusing political realism with actual realism. My opinion is that it's the ISTps who have their feet closest to the ground. So I guess you're paying the price for being too sane

[Gilly]

INFjs know when to step aside. They comment before you start and after you're done, but they don't provide a running commentary.

I'm glad you've made this observation as well. EPs are life's running commentators I have an ENFp friend that I hang out with a bit when I'm at home, and when we get high and go to the movies....hoooo boy.....

[flower]

I don't know what I want or want to do. But I've got a very clear idea about what I'm going to do. ...

Ah i see, that is what I pick up with ESTj's, that "I know what im going to do" vibe.

It's very confusing to hear a self-confessed ISTp talk about envy (but the nature of the issue envied clarifies it somewhat).

Yeah, I say that because I can never stop considering all the things I could do, actions I could take etc, I can always think of 100 good and bad reasons for every course of action, and find it hard to place weights and values to each thing. Any decision (shall I go out tonight, what job shall I do..ect) is always very hard to make and even after I have made that decison, Im still open to changing it. It would be nice to have that resolute ability to aim in one direction and have full faith that it will take you in a good direction.

Socionists tend to call ESTp the most realist group. In my opinion they're confusing political realism with actual realism. My opinion is that it's the ISTps who have their feet closest to the ground. So I guess you're paying the price for being too sane

Hmm, I think you maybe onto something there, ESTp's certainly do focus on people things more than ISTp's, and ISTp's on physical world things more than ESTp's. Perhaps... Sane => Actual realism => Considering physical probabilitys in regards to cause and effect of decisions/actions => procastination due to multiple possibilities => ongoing procastination due to ongoing changes in probabilities of old possibilities, changing availability of those paths and new paths opening up.

Finally => i wanna be ESTj and just know what to do :wink:

[cracka]

I don't wonder at all that cracka believes he's ESTj, but I gotta say that dichotomically speaking everything he writes here is ESFj. I of course believe that since people change through quadras it doesn't really matter and this is utterly insignificant but anyone who wants to pursue the "No, no, you're not UFGt, you're UFZt!" thingy, please feel free to hound cracka.

Not that I don't utterly frigging love reading his posts anyway.

You may be right.
Sweet, that's all I needed today, an identity crisis...lol

[XoX]

I don't wonder at all that cracka believes he's ESTj, but I gotta say that dichotomically speaking everything he writes here is ESFj. I of course believe that since people change through quadras it doesn't really matter and this is utterly insignificant but anyone who wants to pursue the "No, no, you're not UFGt, you're UFZt!" thingy, please feel free to hound cracka.

Not that I don't utterly frigging love reading his posts anyway.

You may be right.
Sweet, that's all I needed today, an identity crisis...lol

Being ESFj would be cool. You'd have the whole Internet full of duals. Look at any forum and BOOM half of them are your duals. Cool ain't it? I'm not sure you are ESFj though so don't convert yet It is not impossible though.

[Smilingeyes]

You may be right.
Sweet, that's all I needed today, an identity crisis...lol

Well, I wouldn't worry too much about it , not that you seem worried. I don't doubt at all that you've lived an estjish life, everything you've told seems to implicate that. But there are matters that make me wonder. In one of your posts you explained how throughout your childhood/youth always were a responsible kid who felt himself kind of old, but that recently you've begun to feel very youngish. You've told how you've pretty much mastered the skills that are important in your work environment, which I take to mean that you are using less time to learn new skills than you did before. I have difficulty with the idea of an ESTj who is certain about his own skills (even when he should be), and equally I would have difficulty with an ESFj who felt he couldn't do anything right. Also there's the constant ... playfulness or giddiness that seems to infuse your posts. These things make me wonder if there are maybe changes happening in your life and the way you live it. I experienced such a thing around the time I was entering high school and such things are what I would relate to an ESTj who is ready to go to the ethical side.

...OR...

Maybe what you act like on the forum has no connection to what happens in your real life? *shrug* Anyway, glad to meet you

[cracka]

You may be right.
Sweet, that's all I needed today, an identity crisis...lol

Well, I wouldn't worry too much about it , not that you seem worried. I don't doubt at all that you've lived an estjish life, everything you've told seems to implicate that. But there are matters that make me wonder. In one of your posts you explained how throughout your childhood/youth always were a responsible kid who felt himself kind of old, but that recently you've begun to feel very youngish.

It's not as much me feeling very youngish as it is getting to live and do things that I didn't when I was younger and still in school. When I posted that I was mostly speaking of: going out a lot, partying, and just having a lot more fun than nwhen I was in school setting up the rest of my life. I hope that makes a little sense.

You've told how you've pretty much mastered the skills that are important in your work environment, which I take to mean that you are using less time to learn new skills than you did before. I have difficulty with the idea of an ESTj who is certain about his own skills (even when he should be), and equally I would have difficulty with an ESFj who felt he couldn't do anything right.

This one is somewhat tricky for me to answer. On one side yes, I know pretty much everything I need to know at this point of what I do and I am very confident when it comes to my work. It's not that I don't want to learn new skills, there's just none left to learn. This is why lately I've been sending resume's out looking for a new career, one in which I won't feel as stagnant as what I do now. But, in all actuality I'm afraid of leaving because I have been in my line of work for the past 6 years and feel like I lost everything I learned when it comes to my degree.

Also there's the constant ... playfulness or giddiness that seems to infuse your posts. These things make me wonder if there are maybe changes happening in your life and the way you live it. I experienced such a thing around the time I was entering high school and such things are what I would relate to an ESTj who is ready to go to the ethical side.

Since I know nothing about socionics I don't want to pretend to know anything, so I come across as playful or whatever else you can call it because it's kind of my way of saying I'm just here cuz I like it here and nothing I say should be taken as anything more than my POV and opinion which is usually loaded with sarcasm enough anyway to kind of make sure people don't take what I say as seriously as they would someone that actually knows what they are talking about.
As far as changes go...yeah many many things not going right these days for me and those close to me but not something I'm gonna get into on a forum. :wink:

Maybe what you act like on the forum has no connection to what happens in your real life? *shrug* Anyway, glad to meet you

I'd say I'm quite a bit in real life like I am on here but I couldn't really say since I'm me...lol
also, a pleasure to meet you.

[mustachio]

bye

[cracka]

don't mean to poop on your party but it almost seems like you're all making ESTJ sound like the most enviable type of all. correct me if i am wrong...

hahaha, maybe in this thread there's some good things about estj's, I think it's just a part of the subject matter being talked about here...lol there's way more posts against estj's than there will ever be good about them on this forum...lol

[Gilly]

Smilex, I can't help but notice that you very readily seem to attribute things to Socionics that really have no business within the model. You think cracka is becoming ESFj just because he seems a bit giddy in some of his posts? Are you really attributing your problems with INFjs to "acting ESFj?" You also talk about INTjs having baseless and uninformed opinions, babbling on about nonsense as though nothing they say is of any worth to anyone. What's this about? Are you intentionally placing a typist perspective on everything you say for a reason? Am I missing something? For someone who has contributed some very interesting perspectives to the forum, and the socionics community at large, you seem to harbor some very out-of-place biases and misconceptions.

[FDG]

Smilex, I can't help but notice that you very readily seem to attribute things to Socionics that really have no business within the model. You think cracka is becoming ESFj just because he seems a bit giddy in some of his posts? Are you really attributing your problems with INFjs to "acting ESFj?" You also talk about INTjs having baseless and uninformed opinions, babbling on about nonsense as though nothing they say is of any worth to anyone. What's this about? Are you intentionally placing a typist perspective on everything you say for a reason? Am I missing something? For someone who has contributed some very interesting perspectives to the forum, and the socionics community at large, you seem to harbor some very out-of-place biases and misconceptions.

He's just speaking about what he has seen and experienced. Don't get pissy just because you lost a debate with him.

[Smilingeyes]

don't mean to poop on your party but it almost seems like you're all making ESTJ sound like the most enviable type of all. correct me if i am wrong...

hahaha, maybe in this thread there's some good things about estj's, I think it's just a part of the subject matter being talked about here...lol there's way more posts against estj's than there will ever be good about them on this forum...lol

I don't get it. Why would anyone, anyone envy an ESTj?

[cracka]

don't mean to poop on your party but it almost seems like you're all making ESTJ sound like the most enviable type of all. correct me if i am wrong...

hahaha, maybe in this thread there's some good things about estj's, I think it's just a part of the subject matter being talked about here...lol there's way more posts against estj's than there will ever be good about them on this forum...lol

I don't get it. Why would anyone, anyone envy an ESTj?

anyone can be the object of someone else's envy, so why not. :wink: Maybe the word envy was used speaking of just a certain thing about ESTJ's, for that they envy them.

[Smilingeyes]

Smilex, I can't help but notice that you very readily seem to attribute things to Socionics that really have no business within the model. You think cracka is becoming ESFj just because he seems a bit giddy in some of his posts? Are you really attributing your problems with INFjs to "acting ESFj?" You also talk about INTjs having baseless and uninformed opinions, babbling on about nonsense as though nothing they say is of any worth to anyone. What's this about? Are you intentionally placing a typist perspective on everything you say for a reason? Am I missing something? For someone who has contributed some very interesting perspectives to the forum, and the socionics community at large, you seem to harbor some very out-of-place biases and misconceptions.

1. What makes you think you know all the things that have a statistical connection to being a given type? Almost anything might. That's what type-watching technique is all about. Gulenko's descriptions include stuff about ESTjs being careful about cleaning their shoes! This is very different from the traits that are mechanically tied to a person's type. I've just about learned by heart and written on the forum everything there's to know about the mechanics of types. If I want to keep progressing I need to start learning type-watching techniques. You might have noted that I have only rarely taken part in the typing of actual people up to now. I need to start acting more on this front.

2. No. I'm not attributing problems with INFj to acting ESFj. I must have been unclear and you must have misunderstood something. I don't think I have any particular problems with INFjs in general or the specific ones in my life at the moment.

3. INTjs... well... all alphas have an intensely personal point of view and way to describe their experiences and opinions. All alphas are more likely than people from other quadras to have some sort of weirdness in their opinions. Sometimes they're correct to be different, sometimes they're not. When they talk about stuff in which they have expertise, they're probably the best around and extremely worth listening to. When not, well, the listener better use his own judgement. When this alpha quality is connected with the way IJs moderate their experiences and weed out conflicting information... There are some interesting results. Read Ganin's alternative INTj description to get an inside view to the issue. If you want to, you can put some of it on personal bias as well. My father, whom I've learned to understand a lot better through socionics is INTj and ... well, he's extremely intelligent and an extremely highly regarded scientist, but he's also a complete loony. I actually wonder if he could pass a mental state exam, not because of him possessing an actual mental disease but because some of the things he absolutely believes in are... slightly odd.

4. As to you calling my opinions misconceptions, well, you have your point of view, I don't. If you prove something I say wrong I'll thank you because this will teach me something. Till then.

[Gilly]

Smilex, I can't help but notice that you very readily seem to attribute things to Socionics that really have no business within the model. You think cracka is becoming ESFj just because he seems a bit giddy in some of his posts? Are you really attributing your problems with INFjs to "acting ESFj?" You also talk about INTjs having baseless and uninformed opinions, babbling on about nonsense as though nothing they say is of any worth to anyone. What's this about? Are you intentionally placing a typist perspective on everything you say for a reason? Am I missing something? For someone who has contributed some very interesting perspectives to the forum, and the socionics community at large, you seem to harbor some very out-of-place biases and misconceptions.

He's just speaking about what he has seen and experienced. Don't get pissy just because you lost a debate with him.

What on earth makes you think that this has anything to do with prior interactions? I can assure you, it doesn't. It's just something that I noticed that bothered me.

And what investment do you have in any of this anyways? Trying to "point out bullshit?"

[Smilingeyes]

Smilex, I can't help but ....

He's just speaking about what he has seen and experienced. Don't get pissy just because you lost a debate with him.

I'd like to think he's got nobler motives than this, but it does rather appear that he's 'on my case'. Any inside information on what's the correct level of submittal to make an ExTp happy and find another hobby? *joking* Actually me and Gilligan's rather direct way of speaking to each other goes way back and I'm pretty sure we both know that the other respects the other while being 'properly intellectually tough' at the same time. His recent block-type descriptions on the site are impressive work and so on. Also he seems to have picked on how my views are more concrete, of the sensory orientation lately, making them seem more rough, more 'aristocratic' ie. more cathegorical, which may seem as if I had lost some of my smarts or something. Can't be helped though, I'm not going back to ENTj communication for a long while if I can help it.

But anyway, FDG, thanks for the sentiment, really. I'm not used to someone else defending me in public so I don't know what to say, but that kind of stuff is a big deal for me. (Praises I get, defense not so often.)

[Smilingeyes]

What on earth makes you think that this has anything to do with prior interactions? I can assure you, it doesn't. It's just something that I noticed that bothered me.

And what investment do you have in any of this anyways? Trying to "point out bullshit?"

We cool? As far as I'm concerned you're ok.

[Gilly]

1. What makes you think you know all the things that have a statistical connection to being a given type? Almost anything might. That's what type-watching technique is all about. Gulenko's descriptions include stuff about ESTjs being careful about cleaning their shoes! This is very different from the traits that are mechanically tied to a person's type. I've just about learned by heart and written on the forum everything there's to know about the mechanics of types. If I want to keep progressing I need to start learning type-watching techniques. You might have noted that I have only rarely taken part in the typing of actual people up to now. I need to start acting more on this front.

I don't claim to know anything about statistically connected traits. All I'm interested in is what can be credibly shown to be connected with functions as they manifest in type. This is why I see what you refer to as "type-spotting" traits as superficial and unrelated to type. They may be peculiarities that are seemingly correlated to type or function, but to me, they're completely irrelevant, and largely useless in determining type accurately.

2. No. I'm not attributing problems with INFj to acting ESFj. I must have been unclear and you must have misunderstood something. I don't think I have any particular problems with INFjs in general or the specific ones in my life at the moment.

Then I misunderstood you.

3. INTjs... well... all alphas have an intensely personal point of view and way to describe their experiences and opinions. All alphas are more likely than people from other quadras to have some sort of weirdness in their opinions. Sometimes they're correct to be different, sometimes they're not. When they talk about stuff in which they have expertise, they're probably the best around and extremely worth listening to. When not, well, the listener better use his own judgement. When this alpha quality is connected with the way IJs moderate their experiences and weed out conflicting information... There are some interesting results. Read Ganin's alternative INTj description to get an inside view to the issue. If you want to, you can put some of it on personal bias as well. My father, whom I've learned to understand a lot better through socionics is INTj and ... well, he's extremely intelligent and an extremely highly regarded scientist, but he's also a complete loony. I actually wonder if he could pass a mental state exam, not because of him possessing an actual mental disease but because some of the things he absolutely believes in are... slightly odd.

So some of us have peculiar ideas or beliefs. I fail to see the connection between this and the grounds on which you insist that "INTjs are generally less interested in the world, have less life experience and have more baseless opinions." I also fail to see how INTjs "mouth off" or bullshit more than any other type, and it just plain old pisses me off when I see shit like this being called type related.

4. As to you calling my opinions misconceptions, well, you have your point of view, I don't. If you prove something I say wrong I'll thank you because this will teach me something. Till then.

I call them misconceptions because they seem, to me at least, to be blatanly unrelated to type in any relevant way

[Gilly]

What on earth makes you think that this has anything to do with prior interactions? I can assure you, it doesn't. It's just something that I noticed that bothered me.

And what investment do you have in any of this anyways? Trying to "point out bullshit?"

We cool? As far as I'm concerned you're ok.

I have absolutely no problem with you whatsoever. Your ideas interest me, and I find your theories and explanations to be very insightful. I harbor no ill will against you; I simply questioned your motives for saying certain things. Don't get caught up in FDG's misconstrued interpretation of human interaction

[Gilly]

Actually me and Gilligan's rather direct way of speaking to each other goes way back and I'm pretty sure we both know that the other respects the other while being 'properly intellectually tough' at the same time.

This is what I had always assumed. It seems to fit my interactions with Ego-Block types.

[Smilingeyes]

The natural role of alphas is to be the avant-garde, the people who create such things as others can't even imagine, create the completely new ideas, revolutionary twists thereof, take skills to their highest limits and show all of these off to the world... but a new idea needs to go through beta and gamma before it's generally applicable. Of new interpretations of science very few are succesful. Of new theories very few work. Of revolutionary ethical systems most collapse quickly. And so on, and so on. Alphas have the job of creating completely new things, but new things have bugs and faults. What works on paper, rarely works in action. What works in the mind of the scientist rarely works in reality. What works in controlled circumstances in the lab rarely works in the field. And so on, and so on. Gammas mainly parrot popular opinion or trivialities. Deltas use the most conventional possible methods, encyclopedias and so on. Alphas can't. It's a fact of life that people who follow conventional methods and conventional opinion make less mistakes than those that don't. I don't think there's anything nobler in being conventional. It's easy to be the guy watching someone try to create a room temperature superconductor. But being non-conventional carries the price of doing more mistakes. And that's why an alpha is more likely to fuck up than a person of other quadras. It's not the fault of alphas. If anything, it's a sacrifice on their part and their gift to everyone else. Alphas do the pioneering, Betas weed out the bad ideas, Gammas perfect the system, Deltas do the mass production. That's just how it goes. It's the goddamn point of alphas to be the people who talk crap and are allowed to talk crap because some of their crap will turn out to be a cure for cancer or the fusion power plant or something...

So what the fuck are the gamma scientists all about then? Well, since most alphas try to invent new things they don't always pay enough interest to stuff that's already in existence. They don't necessarily look for the implications of existing stuff or spend time connecting dots. Gammas do. If there's enough ground-work done in some area, a sufficiently bright mind can connect the dots and see things that others have just missed since they were pursuing their own pet projects. That's what gamma scientists are all about. Again, is it more noble to leech off others' work than to do your own? *shrug*

I think I'm a bastard in regard to all types and quadrs and temperaments, not just alphas and not just INTjs. Yet I'll continue to claim that alphas talk a lot of crap, as they should.

[Gilly]

It's interesting that you have that perspective, because I've always viewed types as the ones who connect the dots or "put the pieces together:" I find that I tend to see the same things that everyone else sees, but I'm more aware of inherent connections and similarities that just aren't obvious to other people. I see the role of Gammas in science as identifying exactly WHAT the problem is, what the precise criteria for solving the proble mare, and being able to see when, say, a project or experiment is just a dead end.

I see what you are saying about Alphas, but the way you said it made it seem as though you were implying that the existence of Alphas in the world produces only a FEW good, albeit necessary, things, and that the Alphas who don't are just cannon fodder. I see what you mean now, but I think you were definitely right in attributing the miscommunication to an Aristocratic approach/communication style. As a matter of fact, this discourse has helped me see a bit more of how that dichotomy works itself out. I see what you mean now, though, and I apologize if I seemed harsh in my criticism of your standpoint.

[Phaedrus]

The natural role of alphas is to be the avant-garde, the people who create such things as others can't even imagine, create the completely new ideas, revolutionary twists thereof, take skills to their highest limits and show all of these off to the world...

So what the fuck are the gamma scientists all about then? Well, since most alphas try to invent new things they don't always pay enough interest to stuff that's already in existence. They don't necessarily look for the implications of existing stuff or spend time connecting dots. Gammas do.

Good characterization. I completely agree. I wish people paid more attention to this, especially in their typings of INTjs and INTps. (Of course it is useful in relation to other types as well, but I stick to what I am most interested in, and the debates about the true nature of those two types keep popping up quite often without leading to any satisfactory consensus.)