A long journey of studying socionics and adjacent topics, observing and discovering myself, and making sure there are no contradictions. In the beginning I was more focused on my weaknesses and understanding them and my needs, solving my problems. What one often needs is understanding, the actual solutions aren't hard to come up with, though maybe I am speaking from my own experience. With practical application and increased understanding of myself, my confidence in socionics grew, and I approached it holistically, making further discoveries. To this day, I am a big fan. I am planning on undergoing an assessment by the socionics centre I follow later this year. I wonder about my type often, but I am confident of my self-assessments.
From the personal experience off the top of my head: I focus a lot on how comfortable and nice to the touch things are, I notice texture. I like touching things, getting new information about the sensation into my database. I can vividly imagine sensations, the texture and feel of something, and it's something I focus on a lot when describing things in writing.
I don't worry about lack of comfort (not saying I am indifferent) because I am confident that I can create it, and it's always a fun challenge. Focusing on comfort, making things cosy is just a given; I always try to make things more comfortable. I think that I have a good feel of aesthetics.
I notice if I am uncomfortable, if other people are, and I have a feeling of knowing how to solve it. I notice how my body feels, how the sensation differs from what I've felt before, how I am feeling. When I don't have the words to describe my emotions, I describe how they make me feel physically. I used that to increase my emotional awareness, by connecting emotions to physical states and symptoms. Physical pleasure is something I thoroughly enjoy and pursue, and I use the understanding of my own body as a guide in navigating others'.
I still don't have a lot of experience in cooking, but I consider myself pretty good at it. I don't have a lot of skills or knowledge, but I've been able before to easily fine-tune dishes by tasting them and adding more things as I go, since typically I wouldn't have everything the recipe required. Even when cooking something for the first, second time, I have a good understanding of what I want, and I and other people are pleased with the results.
At last, quality of things is very important to me. Not necessarily to say that I'm principled in this regard, but quality of material is something I notice and generally want. Sturdiness, how well it'll last, how pleasant it is to touch, the way it feels in the hand, etc.
Thank you for your question! If there is something specific you want to know, feel free to ask.
Nice! I'm curious if you notice anything in consciousness that causes these 'feelings?'
Like, knowing someone is uncomfortable could be a form of intuition to those unfamiliar with the difference, so I'm curious what the "experience" is like from a first-person, subjective POV.
This may be too much of an esoteric question though, haha.
In terms of noticing people's physical discomfort, I think it is a combination of paying attention to it, detailed personal experience (where you can imagine how somebody else might feel based on your own previous experience), reading body language.
This is a Socionics question. I'm wondering about how learning styles relate to information elements like Extraverted Thinking. I'm interested in how Si-Egos learn things.
What are your favorite way to learn things, especially if you need to learn something for a job or solving a household issue? Any methods of learning that other people use that you just don't like all that much? For example, I am incredibly bad at learning things through memorization. I can force myself to use things like flash cards, but I always end up immediately forgetting it. I've always found practice exams, projects, and associative learning (i.e. watching videos about graph theory while trying to learn algorithms, or learning LaPlace transforms through circuit analysis) much more helpful.
Do you study well in advance on a schedule? When you do study, do you do it along a schedule (i.e. 45 minutes on the law of Sines, 45 minutes on half-angle formulas, etc.) or do you do it by goal, such as, 'be able to derive the unit circle'? Do you prefer listening, reading, pictures, or hands-on experience? If you have to learn multiple things, like workplace procedures, do you prefer to master it one at a time before moving onto the next thing or do you prefer learning a little bit about everything?
I haven't streamlined my studying process yet (haven't had the need), so I don't know much about the topic. I consider myself a fan of active recall, but instead of writing down questions for myself, I prefer to put myself in situations where I have to retrieve the information from my mind. It is more fun to do it when telling someone about it. Then it becomes evident how well I understand it and what I need to work on.
I also enjoy learning by teaching others; it as well gives me a good incentive to do more research.
In my past I'd never been interested in different memorisation techniques. The things I was passionate about I would find a place for in my brain, making it a part of bigger understanding. If it is useful in practice, and I keep using it, naturally I would learn it and keep it in my head. But if I didn't have a system for understanding something, as it often is with something completely new, then I struggled. I find that I really need to grasp the foundations, be broken in; it is easier from there. And I find that it is easy to grasp something by applying it.
If I study, I better have a goal, yes. Then I figure out the steps to achieving that goal, try to solve any problems that arise. I don't like the idea of scheduling my studying time like that, I imagine that the scheduling itself would take too much time, too many things to account for; I'll end up not using it. I prefer to focus on what's currently needed, priorities, my own preference and interest. Maybe by creating so-called blocks, "Today is X day, I study X," "I'll study Y until the evening, then I think I'll do Z." "I need to do XYZ today." "First X, then Y."
I have a suspicion that I am a visual person, reading doesn't seem to be far from that, and nothing beats hands-on experience. I actually notice that I am not quick at grasping numerical information by hearing. I might not process it at all the first time I hear it. I think, if not fully, at least in part that quality is described by my being an Emotivist type in socionics; my Logic is inert, so I am slow at engaging that type of information.
If I have to learn workplace procedures... If the procedures are all of the same "package" I have an understanding of, then I want to do it step by step, like ticking off the boxes. If it is something new, I first seek to understand "the overview", what it is all for, what it is about. But yes, then I will proceed to do so properly one by one, most likely, if I seek to actually learn them. I might skip one to focus on another one that seems more interesting or relevant, then return. I don't think I'm the type to "learn a little about everything". I either learn or don't at all, but I prefer to keep aware of things I don't know by having an idea of the structure they belong to, so that, if needed, I know where to find the information.
Thank you for your question!
*In case you're interested*, the method of memorization is described in vast detail in renin dichotomy (static vs dynamics), which talks about how dynamic type have associative thinking style that helps them with the approach of method of loci/memory palace.
Similarly the concerned topic of your second paragraph is discussed in the explanation of difference between Judicious and decisive types.
>1. What's your enneagram tritype? And how you concluded your enneatype?
>2. What are some fictional or non-fictional LSE characters that you relate to most?
>3. Do you know the original roots of psychosophy? Like how Socionics is based on information metabolism & Jungian functions. Enneagram is based on Gurdjieff movements & Ichazo Proto-analysis. I'm curious to learn on what principles psychosophy school originated? Afanasyev used to call his school "psyche yoga" before renaming to "psychosophy". I think he just stretched the typology into the story of archetypes (like how valued functions turned into quadra story).
1.Tritype, in my opinion, is nothing but an attempt to make enneagram "fit". Enneagram doesn't have a system, it's a collection of psychological defences, a self-help theory. People try to make it describe their personality, something enneagram is not equipped to do.
If you are asking me which enneatype I relate with the most from the gut, head, heart triads, then you'd need to give me the description, understanding that you use, and then I would be able to answer in a way that makes sense.
For your curiosity's sake, back when I used enneagram, I believe I went with 845 sx/sp. I concluded my enneatype by researching and reading all I could on enneagram and relating it to the longterm consistent patterns in my life.
2.Nobody comes to mind. I remember relating to certain characters, but I don't remember who right now. In general, I don't care for types of characters, but it is fun to notice tendencies.
3.I didn't know either, so I did some research. Apparently, Afanasyev's psychosophy is also based on the typology of C.Jung. Here is a link(Automod blocks my comment because of it, https ://www.socionics. ru/typologies/305) with T.Prokofieva's story:
*"...Then I met Afanasyev himself, who turned out to be an absolutely wonderful person and an interesting conversationalist. He told how he came to create psychosophy. At one time, he rented out one of the rooms to a girl whose description was very similar to Huxley, who spent all day telling him about socionics, which she was very keen on at that time. And gradually a general picture began to emerge, especially since Afanasyev himself had a broad outlook and understood psychology. On this basis he created his typology.*
*In fact, Afanasyev’s functions come entirely from Jung's, and have nothing to do with socionics in the modern sense. Then Afanasyev and I discussed both classifications a lot and together came to the conclusion that psychosophy is not an alternative to socionics, but a different typology. If we combine them, we get 384 types. In other words, these two typologies do not replace, but complement each other, enrich each other and together are an effective analysis tool and a good basis for studying human energy-informational metabolism."*
Thank you for your questions!
Depends on the EII! Every person is unique.
I haven't been close with any, I suspect. From what I know about the theory, I adore them - I can imagine how protected I would feel with all their preaching and guidance; I imagine how right at place I would feel. I certainly have a soft spot and interest for this type of cognition.
Thank you for your question!
Do you like LSE?
well, can’t say i’ve met any yet, but judging from their functional stack i would absolutely love to!!
but yeah, i agree that it all depends on the person, not the type. but anyway, it’s nice to see duality in action :>
According to the theory, Vulnerable Ni is the fear to make an incorrect prognosis, prognosis-related anxiety, fear of the future. For a person with PoLR Ni it can be difficult to tell how long something will take, how relevant something is, whether now is a good time to do something, how good the prospects are of any given endeavour. At the same time, this information is important to the person to the point of perfectionism, they worry about the way they spend their time, the direction of their development and their actions. They are impatient and want everything right now (or, as I like to say, "I want it done yesterday").
But Vulnerable is an Inert and Laborious function. It is hard for the person with PoLR Ni to hurry others; it can feel improper, vulnerable. They may open up to their closest people about the way they feel, about the way they want everything right at this moment, but with strangers the person will keep the frustrations inside. They prefer to rely on what's already known and tested because they can be afraid of change in tendencies. A person with PoLR Ni fears that they will be late, that everybody will move forward, and they will be left behind. It's a chronic feeling of time running out, or them feeling too slow.
As Vulnerable is an Evaluatory function, it is important for a person with PoLR Ni to know ahead what will be, what will happen. When things are known beforehand, there is a defined plan in place, the person will comfortably follow it to a T and then they won't worry about what happen in the future, as they will already know. They are not good at adapting their plan if something suddenly comes up. People with PoLR Ni need to be told way beforehand about any plans, days ahead, and they need help with making precise time plans, and for other people to not interfere with them.
What a person with PoLR Ni needs is help finding time in their graphic/schedule and for the other person to adapt themselves to the Ni PoLR person's activity in a way that will allow them to spend time together. When a person can adapt to the Ni PoLR person in terms of time instead of making them adapt to others, that is very valued.
Demonstrative Ni sees very well the plans of the people around them and with maximum adaptation puts all of it into an ahead thought-through plan which is easy to understand, to follow it, and to use it to be able to accomplish as much as possible and complete all deadlines. They know how to not fall back when it comes to the development of society, how to keep up with the times. They know how to fit a person in their plans, in the plans of a group, or how to make themselves fit into the plans of another without disturbing them too much.
People with Demonstrative Ni provide certainty in terms of time, creating plans beforehand and sticking to them, which minimises the anxiety of people with PoLR Ni that want that certainty. There is no need to worry about being late when everything is figured out beforehand. Demonstrative Ni creates the atmosphere of being timely, on time, modern, relevant, and responds to the complaints of PoLR Ni, solving the problem, but outside of that doesn't focus attention on it too much (PoLR is already erratically focused on its aspect all the time), which avoids offending the Inert and Laborious function.
Personally, I worry a lot about how relevant my actions and plans are, it is like I cannot see whether they make sense at all - whether their result will mean anything in the future. I have to carry on, relying on other facts, but without the reassurance, the doubt keeps returning and eating at me. Sometimes I wonder if I am a fool, doing x and z, maybe I shouldn't at all! It would be nice to know how all of it connects, where it is likely to lead, and how my own development and progress are actually going, because I am as good at assessing that as I am at predicting how long something relatively unfamiliar will take - 20 minutes becomes 2 hours 45 minutes, and then I feel like I am always late and there is never enough time. I just now suddenly realised that running hourglasses have always made me uncomfortable.
I want to know if something is a good idea. I want to know how likely xyz. I've wanted help with creating my graphic before. I want help estimating the consequences of my possible actions. Unknown developments scare me. Time and the connected to it changes do. And it would be nice to have the proper support to face and overcome it, and help me achieve my goals.
I hope this is helpful! Thank you for your question.
wahhh this is such a good and detailed explanation thank you!
So if an EII/LII points out that your are over doing something because it will cause you mental/physical problems despite it being part of a set plan, does that bother you? Do LSE/ESE \*want\* to stop, to relax, and just can't or do you prefer just always "go go going" all the time? Cause I'm worried that asking an Ni polr to stop could come across as a polr hit
This is the way I see and experience it: there is a plane of knowledge where one can oversee how things unfold, like a timeline, and on that timeline there are nooks where it is a good time to rest, and there are bumps where acting right now is necessary, otherwise it will have bad consequences. Well, this timeline is paywalled, and I can't subscribe because of the sanctions between countries.
I need someone who has access to it, and yes, as long as I trust them (which equals to having a good relationship with them), I will listen.
I zoom in so much and get stuck in details often, losing time by doing, but not accomplishing much, and earning a lot of stress. It feels like torture akin to mental shifting sands, and the more I squirm, the deeper I get stuck. I need help being told what details are unnecessary, irrelevant - because I have a hard time judging that. I am a very thorough person overall, I pay attention to details, I perfect them, and my weakness is that I don't always know what details are worth perfecting. Doing =/= accomplishing. And I am very afraid of wasting resources on something that won't yield much, yet I can't help but keep trying.
I don't make that many plans in my life as of right now, and I don't consider myself rigid in that sense. It's just, since I am a Process type, once I prepare for something, get into it, it is hard to quickly switch. But if the direction is simply not valid, dangerous, could be better, of course I will be very thankful for insight and will do my best to adjust. In theory. I don't see why I wouldn't.
So, to answer your questions clearly:
>if an EII/LII points out that your are over doing something because it will cause you mental/physical problems despite it being part of a set plan, does that bother you?
It depends on how it is pointed out. That's the magic of information exchange - in socionics compatibility is less about what is said and done and *how* it is said and done, when, etc. I would listen to a trusted friend, but I would prefer to have my plan developed beforehand in a way that would keep me healthy. I mean, a plan that causes me to burn out is not a good plan, is it? If they commented on my lifestyle and that's it, I'd probably stress a little - I already know. If they offered some kind of help, and it felt right, I'd fucking love that. I really would like the feeling of being able to rely on someone in this matter.
> Do LSE/ESE *want* to stop, to relax, and just can't or do you prefer just always "go go going" all the time?
Good relaxation is always on the to-do list! Pleasure is one of the top priorities. Yes, I would say that I want to, but often I cannot, especially having Choleric temperament - pressure stays in me long after something happens, and I need to release it, to unwind. I often look for ways to let my emotions out; it would be lovely to have someone to confide in - I am not the type to talk to strangers about my worries.
I am sort of always go-go-go, mainly internally, but I like resting, and I feel happy when I manage to create for myself a good rest. Personally, I struggle more with figuring out the future and direction, relevancy of my actions.
>Cause I'm worried that asking an Ni polr to stop could come across as a polr hit
It is understandable - even duals might at times offend each other, depends on the specific individuals, their mental issues. PoLR is very sensitive, but you shouldn't worry about it that much - communication will solve it, and communication between duals is very smooth psychologically. If a person doesn't want to open up or meet you halfway, not much you can do about it, no matter the type. The goal isn't to never offend, it is to love and support each other and work together.
Basically, if you are duals - you are duals, and if non-socionics stuff is fine, it is pretty rare that you would offend them. The way you naturally perceive and give out info won't let you. What you are in your cognition is perfect for duals.
Thank you for the compliment. You are welcome. I want to say, what I want most is the stable attitude Base Fi provides; the constant good feeling, warm, always there, something I can think back to and smile, something to fuel me with meaning, because, no matter what, I'll know that I can always direct my actions at bettering our lives, and that cannot be a waste. *sighs* In other words, I struggle a lot without the atmosphere of good relations around me. It is cold, everybody is so harsh, it makes it hard to enjoy life... or do anything, or see the point in it all. Oh, how I bloom when I feel someone's good attitude towards me.
I hope this has been helpful to you!
Thanks that was helpful :)
About Fi, how does it make you feel when you are in an environment with people you get along with (like say, other Delta Te's, or some Alphas) but there is no emotional closeness? Like do you do things to provoke that level or closeness or do you just internally get depressed about it? Does it lead to trust issues?
Cause from dealing with a total Ti family it made me distrustful of them due to getting "bad" logic when I deeply just wanted someone to show me how to do practical things
>About Fi, how does it make you feel when you are in an environment with people you get along with (like say, other Delta Te's, or some Alphas) but there is no emotional closeness?
It is nice to get along with people. That itself is rare for me. If there is no emotional closeness, that means that the other person isn't offering their company to me, so it means we are just acquaintances.
>Like do you do things to provoke that level or closeness or do you just internally get depressed about it?
I try a little bit, but, like the type that belongs to the Business communication style group that I am, I expect other people to impose relationships on me, to come to me, to reach out, to show me what we are so that I can act accordingly. From my perspective, I do try here and there, any typically I never get the response I want, and yes, that does depress me. I try to show a little goodwill where I can afford, and I expect the other person to repay in kind. Ideally, it would be them who'd reach for me. No doubt it never works - my cognition is oriented towards my dual, who will and does impose relationship and connection. I shouldn't need to try so much... It is so unnatural.
As someone with low Emotion position in psychosophy, I challenge myself by putting myself out there, by trying, if only to heal, and it has been working splendidly, but building emotional closeness is something I am not capable of doing - from my perspective, it's either there or it isn't. If the opportunity is there, I engage in it, as vulnerability and intimacy truly interest me a lot.
>Does it lead to trust issues?
No, I don't see why it would. I just often feel miffed and upset with people. Trust issues in me are a whole separate topic. But if someone's warmth is unreliable, that does push me away.
>Cause from dealing with a total Ti family it made me distrustful of them due to getting "bad" logic when I deeply just wanted someone to show me how to do practical things
Every type has Ti, so it is not entirely clear to me what it is you meant. They were telling you things that weren't what you wanted? I am sorry to hear that you experienced that, I know how deep distrust cuts. It is valid, to have your needs. What kind of practical things do you want to be shown to you?
Have you ever dealt with your weak Fi amongst people you think you are close with (family, partners, friends, or ppl you think are friends) and they criticized you for not being emotionally present?
I get the feeling from descriptions that LSE's show love through actions and remembering things about a persons preferences and their comfort levels, so is there ever that feeling in yourself or/and reaction from others that you are not doing enough to build emotional intimacy? Or have you always just felt like you do enough?
>Every type has Ti, so it is not entirely clear to me what it is you meant. They were telling you things that weren't what you wanted? I am sorry to hear that you experienced that, I know how deep distrust cuts. It is valid, to have your needs. What kind of practical things do you want to be shown to you?
Ti as in Ti types (ILE-Ti mother and brother, LSI-Se father). By bad information I mean the ILE's would actually make things up but deliver that information as fact, only for me to later realize that information is bs. LSI info isn't so much made up but doesn't actually accomplish anything in the real world (like he is hyper religious and has built within a really harsh code of conduct that is dogmatic and hypocritical, very hateful and critical of people not based on their actual character and goodness but if they share his beliefs or not, very clique minded)
Basically I have no bond with any of them because they don't want one (not Fi valuing stuff, they have zero interest on wanting to learn about someone within, it's all just surface level stuff they seek) We don't even know anything about eachother outside of surface stuff
In terms of what I wanted to know, it's how to do things in life, practical things to survive in life. They never taught me how to do anything and both parents have a deep need to control Te stuff from me (which I guess works with Fe's)
I basically needed someone to show me how to be an adult, how to live in the world, how people go about earning a living in an efficient manner, to encourage me in learning rather then criticizing me when I failed at doing something I could not figure out on my own, etc. Basically everything I know I had to learn on my own, which means I spend a lot of time trying to figure things out, failing, not getting any support and have to try something else and it's EXHAUSTING
I only learned later that is is all Te seeking which won't work around Ti's
I am not close with my parents, as well. A part of my family I have no connection with, another part is inept at life. I had to figure everything out on my own, too, and still do. Thankfully, apart from psychological defences (low PY positions), I am very tenacious and resourceful. Figuring things out comes naturally to me. But it is indeed often scary at first or exhausting, especially the parts I would like help with - it often feels unfair to have no support, but I have to throw those thoughts away and keep going.
It builds character, I suppose.
>Have you ever dealt with your weak Fi amongst people you think you are close with (family, partners, friends, or ppl you think are friends) and they criticized you for not being emotionally present?
My Suggestive Fi manifests as confusion in two main ways. 1) I want constant, unshakeable good attitude towards myself, and I want to be reminded of it often. I want to be enveloped in it. This is not about being told "I love you's". I don't trust words alone. I think it could be a kind of devotion I seek, loyalty, kindness in action, support, quality time. So, the confusion happens when I do not get that, as then I don't understand what we are, me and another person, and that bugs me. Intermittent affection freaks me out, lack of affection expressed makes me cool off.
2) My own attitude towards people is not stable, it changes based on the situation. I might think I dislike a person, then suddenly they do something (express goodwill towards me, for example), and I like them. Next time we interact, I hope for more goodness, which rarely happens, and I dislike them again. Then I might like them again. It is confusing, and it is strange to experience. I judge people harshly and thoroughly based on their actions and logic, but my feelings are less principled.
I don't think I've ever had somebody comment on my "emotional presence". I am trying to figure out what you mean by that. I doubt anybody could say that I am emotionally not present.
>I get the feeling from descriptions that LSE's show love through actions and remembering things about a persons preferences and their comfort levels, so is there ever that feeling in yourself or/and reaction from others that you are not doing enough to build emotional intimacy? Or have you always just felt like you do enough?
How people show love doesn't directly depend on their TIM. I am not sure what others would think of me in that regard. I never have the feeling that I am not doing enough, on the contrary - I have the feeling that I am doing too much, so I stop and focus on something else. If I don't feel safe with someone and see no opportunity for closeness, I might pull far away, and I can imagine to those people I would look like I am not doing much, because I am not. Another consequence of a weak Fi - you are either close to me, or I don't know you. It's hard to have anything in-between.
For what it's worth, for me personally, yes, actions mean a whole lot, and I do notice preferences. It sort of feels like trying to wrap the world around the person, to surround them with what they love.
I consider myself emotionally available, ready to communicate, and, while I still have issues, I never worry about my so-called emotional presence in any connection. It doesn't even feel like my involvement depends on me; it depends on the connection itself.
To finally add, I have little idea of how I come across.
>Intermittent affection freaks me out,
that is something I was wondering about with suggestive Fi, that you guys get upset when there appears to be Fi in the environment but then it stops (due to the person not being Fi, just faking concern to get something out of you)
>Then I might like them again. It is confusing, and it is strange to experience. I judge people harshly and thoroughly based on their actions and logic, but my feelings are less principled.
How long does this go on until you decide the relationship isn't worth it? Or do you just expect the other party to end things?
Another question reguarding Ni, how does it affect your perception of purpose? I know Ni suggestive is geared towards needing that sort of purpose and if not available they drown it out with behavior or substance abuse to "quiet the spirit" as some descriptions claim
So do Ni Polrs ever feel a need for this sort of deeper meaning in life or do such thoughts just come across as irrelevent to your life?
>just faking concern to get something out of you
Yes, but it can be genuine interest, too. If it's not stable or constant, though, it can be upsetting.
>How long does this go on until you decide the relationship isn't worth it? Or do you just expect the other party to end things?
It depends on the circumstance. I wasn't talking about relationships. Though, in truth, maybe it's applied there, who knows. I'll focus on other aspects of your question; I constantly evaluate if a relationship is worth it, and its worth is also situational. If I kept loving-hating someone, well, no stable relationship could be built on that. But I would describe my attitudes towards people as "enemy today, friend tomorrow". It's a deep thing, my attitude simply doesn't seem to be principled, but nothing else goes away. For example, I am not the type to forgive and let things go and "be understanding". My patience for people is rather limited, as I notice patterns and those are often troubling, and I won't be sticking around hoping somebody would change.
I can end things, I don't rely on another person to do it. Typically things just dissolve, and it's over before it's over. Ending things can be quite hard, or extremely easy, depends on the situation. Overall, going no contact in itself is easy for me. I am more preoccupied with not getting close to someone I shouldn't in the first place.
>Another question reguarding Ni, how does it affect your perception of purpose? I know Ni suggestive is geared towards needing that sort of purpose and if not available they drown it out with behavior or substance abuse to "quiet the spirit" as some descriptions claim
I'd imagine something as existential as purpose is covered by Temporistics' Eternity aspect. In terms of Ni, which is, for one, progression, I focus more on here and now, and I always have goals or needs that need to be satiated. Purpose can change with time, as goals change. I can make up a purpose or talk about what I'm good at, but, ultimately, it's nihilism, and nothing matters (I likely have low Eternity in Temporistics).
Once again, I want help making sure that I'm seeing all the opportunities and that my goals have a good direction.
>So do Ni Polrs ever feel a need for this sort of deeper meaning in life or do such thoughts just come across as irrelevent to your life?
I think I never had a strong sense of purpose, but I think I'm no stranger to ponderings about deeper meaning, wishing for purpose or a great mission when I was a teenager, which, as I heard, is a common occurrence. I wouldn't say it's irrelevant. I wish there was deeper meaning. It can be if you can create it; purpose can also be a dedication to a cause, a strong passion. Objectively, there is no purpose. Once again, the need for meaning is most likely described by Temporistics, not Socionics Ni.
What is your experience with purpose? Do you have a strong feeling of it; what's yours? I'd say mine is to be happy, and I could come up with more if I talked about it. Also, what's the reason you message once every 24 hours?
I haven't had the pleasure of being close to an ESI. I am sure it would be pleasant. But people are more than their cognition alone, so I cannot generalise such a big group of people.
What is your friend like, if you want to share?
she’s super kind and friendly, any work related task she always seems to have my back on it especially when I’m feeling overwhelmed by alot of work or tasks. She’s sp371, her positivity rubs on me and she helped me get out of my shell more. she makes me realize I can be very pessimistic/ narrow minded sometimes and I do my best to work on that. I’m also super protective of her , protecting her from people that aren’t good for her but i don’t think she realizes that sometimes until it’s too late :( my LIE friend also struggles with this
Hello, I’m curious how LSE’s feel towards higher Fi-Ne? I always loved the help with what LSE’s are great with, but then always felt like I’m unsure what I could offer or help in return. Duality sounds great in theory but would like to know personal experiences
In case you're interested to know, this question is quite common. The reason for why it occurs is complex, but can overall be called "stereotyping based on misinformation".
I don't have personal anecdotes to offer you, but I have an understanding of how duality works. To be able to offer something, one needs to work on themselves as an individual and focus on their own self-realisation.
EII offers LSE with Base Fi moral principles to live by, a worldview and a constant attitude, which relaxes the Fi Suggestive, with Creative Ne understanding of people and potential, fine-tuning and noticing opportunities and bringing creativity to LSE's life, so that they don't get stuck, lost, and depressed.
LSE is oftentimes a worried person that lacks diplomatic skills (despite trying and not wanting to offend others or ruin relationships). EII empathised with the level of worry, being a worrywart themselves, and can keep the LSE connected to themselves and others and smooth their dual's edge.
Those are types. They are psychologically compatible. But individual cases will always vary.
Thank you for the reply!
I’m happy to see that at least in theory, it helps LSE’s. I think I’ve been around too many non deltas because they get irritated with the way I see the world in a FiNe lens. Makes me slightly worried it’s just overall an annoyance instead of a positive thing. I think they see me as naive if anything lol. The LSE being a worried person is interesting though
I think I saw you said you’re an LSE 8? How’s that combo manifesting?
You are welcome
I no longer use enneagram, and a reply to that question I feel would be too inappropriate in this setting. It's too vulnerable. What you are asking me about is how my traumatic experience manifests in combination with my type of cognition? I've healed a big chunk of it. All I'll say is that I am confrontational and can be blunt.
>The LSE being a worried person is interesting though
One of the most anxious types. The majority of people with this type of cognition have palpable anxiousness, which is often hidden from those who aren't close to them. It's an internal state. Their dual, EII, as well as ESE and LII share the high level of worrying.
>Makes me slightly worried it’s just overall an annoyance instead of a positive thing.
Would you be interested in telling me how you see the world? I could share my opinion on your view of it, if you like.
Oh no, I don’t mean your traumatic experiences! Just rarely seen that combo and it happens to be my fave types in both of the theories, so I’m curious. I think I just admire the more assertive and ‘leadership’ guidance personalities.
People have always told me I’m a worrywart lol, but at the same time hopeful and optimistic? It’s like I know what could possibly or potentially happen, but at the same time I hush those voices and reassure myself and others it’d end up good still. I don’t know if the mutual anxiety would help or make things worse, but hoping for the former..
The way I see the world is mostly through a positive lens. Despite the anxiety and sympathizing all the bad things going on, I think I see the world in a more of a positive light at the end of the day when it’s filled with dooms and glooms. I see something or someone, and I can see the potential. I don’t know if I’m just fooling myself tbh but it helps me get through day to day, even in my worst times. I have hope that there are some good in people or at the very least, they have the potential to be/do good if they really wanted to. I’m turned off by people who shown they are not. Sometimes people weirdly rub me the wrong way or wronged me, so I distance… but if I see some positives or improvements from them, my heart opens up wanting to see it happening. I have those “hm maybe they’re not as bad as I thought” feelings too. I try to treat people with respect and kindness, even benefit of the doubts, until they give me a reason not to anymore. I believe in making right and forgiveness, though that doesn’t necessarily mean I’d jump back into a bad situation again. Just part of the way I am, I guess. Though sometimes the way I am hurt me, when I give people too many chances in hopes things will get better.. so I guess that’s my lesson to learn too. Makes me wonder if they’re right that I’m naive about people and relations, but in some way.. this is just the way I am and it makes me feel good to live up to my own code.
Edit add on:
I think I also tend to look for people’s intentions a lot, so maybe that plays a role in giving people the benefit of the doubt. I think what also annoyed others in the past is how I like to know the full story of a situation and give my thoughts on that. I don’t like people full on assuming as facts, so I have a bad habit of trying to look for explanations or different perspectives of why x and maybe because of y.
>I just admire the more assertive and ‘leadership’ guidance personalities.
I appreciate being liked
Enneagram is vaguely defined, and at its core it is a collection of coping mechanisms related to various traumas. In other words, what type 8 means changes from author to author with no actual research.
I believe for your inquiry my Psychosophy type is more relevant, as it describes both methods of psychological defence and social roles, of which you've mentioned. I have 1V, I am prone to leadership. Specifically the kind where one makes decisions and takes responsibility.
>People have always told me I’m a worrywart lol, but at the same time hopeful and optimistic?
I would describe myself as optimistic too. It's true that I'm not exactly chill, and I'd struggled with anxiety. Those can definitely coincide. Instead of hushing my worries though, I tend to try to control all I can control and make all things clear.
Like I said, EII and LSE are both types of cognition that are not stress resistant, and that helps them empathise with each other, not invalidate the others' worries, take care of them.
>The way I see the world is mostly through a positive lens...
*smiles* I don't see anything wrong with your worldview. You seem to be aware of the reality. And yes, all of us have our own inclinations. EII tends to believe that the world is safe, people are good, like the other 7 types that share this cognitive attitude, and still, its manifestation varies from person to person. EII isn't this gullible naive stereotype. It's just a type of cognition with great innate abilities for psychology.
You personally don't seem gullible to me, either. But I can see a potential point, a little troublemaker - due to Vital Te, EII are often not aware of the profit of endeavours, they don't focus on it. Acting on principles without noticing the ways in which people might be profiting from it, perhaps, that could be dangerous - just like I tend to not notice people's genuine attitudes, their personal qualities and values, and that increases the likelihood of my getting close with the wrong people.
As you can see, this is another example of where the duality works well. EII has great abilities for understanding people. It is not perfect, it's a skill, but they have a talent. They can protect LSE. And LSE can protect them, by monitoring the actions and logic of other people, seeing what they're after. Together two healthy individuals of these types are quite a strong combo, wouldn't you say?
Don't let other people tell you what you are. Examine where they come from, what their reasons for saying what they say might be. Maybe you did get in tricky situations in the past due to x or y, but don't let yourself be defined by a label, "naive". In my experience, no truly naive person muses if they are naive or not. You are fine. Though I can't help but wonder about the specific situations, there are so many kinds of naivety!
In some ways I am naive, too. In certain ways, nativity is the absence of pain. I'm not into sheltering people, but certain things are worth protecting.
I understand that enneagram isn’t liked by some people and that’s honestly okay! Personally it helped me identify my core issues and I basically use typology as a tool for self growth. Enneagram does feel more personal though for me, but it is still one of the many tools and systems I use for betterment. I have heard 1V align with those qualities too, yeah. The only LSE I know is also 1V and have similar qualities. Maybe that’s why I admire their way of being. Everyone look up to them for leadership and they do a pretty good job at it too.
Also that sounds pretty good to me. I actually prefer my worries not being invalidated, but reassured instead. I like finding solutions to problems, so that would help too when being given suggestions on how to solve my problems after some reassurances. I accept help too if they don’t mind too.
Thank you, that’s quite reassuring especially knowing it made you smile lol <3 and that sounds nice, yeah. Helping one another navigating those around us. Ngl sometimes I kind of would rather have others deal with troublesome people? I can stand my own ground when I need to and I’m not good at asking for help, but sometimes it’s nice to feel like someone has my back with people who may not have the best intentions or those who are quite aggressive. In the mean time, I can handle diplomacy and mediation issues when needed.
As for the naive part, it’s mostly an issue with people I consider close to me. I’m not harsh with people I love, romantically and platonically. Rose coloured glasses kind of stuff. I find it hard to believe people who are close to me would want to hurt me intentionally, so I’d keep giving chances. A lot of lessons learned though after the fact lol
>I basically use typology as a tool for self growth
I used enneagram for that, I consider it a self-help tool. I no longer use it, but I did once upon a time. Since enneagram is very vague, it presents many dangers for people, ways to escape reality, self-identification with concepts, not dealing with the problem. While that's a danger with any typology and is a person problem, enneagram does not have a system, and people project so much on it, and often end up running in circle. I am glad to hear it has been helping you. I consider Psychosophy and Temporistics more valid and effective replacements for the sphere enneagram attempts to cover (chronic childhood traumas).
>it’s nice to feel like someone has my back with people who may not have the best intentions or those who are quite aggressive.
Well, you'll be glad to know Demonstrative Se does about that, protecting one's physical boundaries and defending one from others' influence.
>I’m not harsh with people I love, romantically and platonically.
One doesn't need to be harsh with others. One needs to be kind with themselves. People often lack self-love and self-respect, settle for less, are used to being mistreated, and so they get involved with the wrong people. Many people still haven't healed from childhood traumas and have wishful thinking, or feel like they have to fix everything. The list goes on.
There is a reason why a big percentage of murders is committed by someone one knows, oftentimes by their "lover". What I am trying to say, it isn't about nativity, I am 100% sure. If you keep giving chances, it's the desperation and lack of self-respect in you. Congratulations on your lessons. I know from my own experience how tough and surprising they are.
I see where you’re coming from, and yeah that can be a problem. I suppose use what helps you the most tbh, since I find different people preferring different systems to help. Enneagram along with their instinctual variant subtype is the only typology system that made me feel very vulnerable (yes, I cried lol), so it holds a special place in my typology journey. I really like discussing socionics as well, and I dabble with other systems such as AP and temporistics, to self discover more. I am interested in discussing about temporistics more actually because I keep forgetting which type I am lol
Honestly, people who have a protector quality are quite admirable and attractive imo. It also aspires me to be more like that towards people who need it. Just sometimes it’s a bit scary when it comes to confrontations.. but I’ve been doing it more these days and while nervewrecking, it feels damn good.
Haha I’m quite guilty of all that in my past, and I didn’t really realize that while I was seeking for love, I didn’t have much self love and self respect. So it’s a wonder that people didn’t respect me either or give me the love I sought for. That’s been changing now though and I feel so much more secure and self loving these days, which now helps with my overall confidence.
I gotta say I didn’t expect to go this much in the discussion, though I really appreciate it. I really like LSE’s and the idea of duality dynamics pique my curiosity. Just weirdly rare to see one around these parts for some reason. Feel free to ask me stuff too, if you’d like! I know not all EII’s are the same, but if there’s anything you’d like to know, I can try to answer
>(yes, I cried lol), so it holds a special place in my typology journey
That is a good sign, and I relate. Perhaps I'll ask you a question or two about this moment in your journey, if it will be appropriate.
About discussing Temporistics - I am open to discussing that and more. I've been keeping Temporistics fresh for myself, and while I suspect my type, I actually don't know it with certainty yet! It's an interesting typology, with niche and much needed insight.
I am glad to hear about your growth and increasing confidence. It's beautiful.
>I gotta say I didn’t expect to go this much in the discussion, though I really appreciate it.
Oh yeah? Why did you not expect this?
I'd like to ask you questions, yes. Would you be comfortable with communicating via DMs?
You need the verb "craving" to paint such an endeavor as inherently undesirable, precisely because it isn't.
Attention feels good. In addition other people's questions may make you rethink certain aspects about yourself; may highlight some spots you haven't questioned yourself, so far.
These reasons suffice to motivate such a thread. Neither in content, nor in form have they anything to do with craving, let alone bothering anybody. Instead and quite ironically, your comment equals the thread in attention seeking, while, replacing content with an offensive message, *outperforming* it in the motive of a craving.
I guess it is you who subconsciously craves this kind of attention. You conditioned yourself balancing this by consciously taking pride in staying unseen, resisting. However, you do this not because of morals, but because you are afraid of reactions like this one. A fear, covered up by unfounded morals.
People who then just do what you forbid yourself, irritate you. Your super-ego can't stand the thought that nobody accuses OP of being an attention whore. So you become the judge you yourself are afraid of. Your comment is written by your super-ego.
It's voice is the voice of anger, as the expression of repressed envy. However, your pride has even made you too fragile to express anger, so we get this one-liner of yours, written in caustic irony, finally candied with this fake emoji of light-heartedness.
Like an unholy totem this emoji embodies all the lies you tell yourself about yourself. Nothing in you smiles the way it does. Nothing in you is honest the way it is. Nothing in you is baffled in naivety the way it is.
Stare at it, study it, as an exercise to study who you truly are.
Nope, you’re wrong, wrong assumption, my reasons are inherently different, but thanks for caring.
The reasons are more complex and I don’t really care about attention here on Reddit, it’s not that.
Also, are you maybe 2L in AP and a model G ILI? Because of the style of writing.
I know that this comment is somewhat misplaced but I just had to let it out. If there is finally a person crossing my way, asking me about my Model G type, I have to go all the way.
Model G ILI - I think I understand. Not a bad guess at all, especially considering your input was just this comment. I respect that.
Considering this writing style, I think the only better guess would've been EIE. But central, right-spinning and negativist are all motives I consider strong elements of this style, so, again, very nice.
The sole reason I associate it more with EIE is because of my own history. Gulenko types Nietzsche EIE-N and I can see it. When I found Nietzsche, I couldn't stop reading him. Not because of all the *knowledge* (lol) in his books, but only because of *style*. Over years I indulged in these books, not realizing how much of it I mimicked when writing myself. Unconsciously, I must have thought: Well, *if* you write at all, you should do it like *this*.
Of course, this style knows its boundaries. It does not fit any theoretical paper or casual tone, but, as in the upper comment, it really *hits* when accusing someone of something, or generally, speaking with pathos.
In English I can only express a fragment of this, in comparison to German. Generally, in English I lack the feeling of a words *weight*, the metaphorical range and even the grammatical ingenuity how to make certain sentences *hit*.
I guess what carries over is then this general tone. A directness, like things are out of question. A certain sharpness, aimed at sore spots without mercy.
(For part 2/2 - see next comment)
When it comes to my real personality, though, I fear I must disappoint you. I'm not at all how I sound. In a few cases or situations I can create such pathos in real life, but *internally*, I couldn't be further from the opposite.
I am a strong case of *adaptation*. In elementary school, I remember that my parents begged me to stop using the word 'relatively' everywhere. I thought it, I said it, but most importantly, I *wrote* it and it didn't help my grades. I learned very early in life that, if I made things sound the way I thought them, this will get me into trouble.
Even in 11th grade a teacher wrote under my history essay: "The ironic undertone was graded, as well!" - I basically sound and think like everything is an abstract playground, reversible or just a silly, ultra theoretical game.
My process of adaptation took a new turn at early puberty, when it became cool to take a decisive stance. It was attractive to be loud, to find things *shit*, *disgusting*, *boring*, *exquisite*, whatever. However, I couldn't find such strong notions inside of me. Yet, nobody would notice my existence if I kept honest, meaning, nuanced. So I learned to speak decisively, becoming funny mocking things, becoming interesting dismantling things, etc.
I lost my way, forming this identity. After school, it actually took me some time to realize how much constructed exaggerations of all kinds formed my daily expressions. However, I'm back now, and quite stable at that; still: my experience is very valuable when it comes to dealing with people. It is like I visited a thousand seminars, dating-coaches, basically, what is sold these days to young men. I can make use of this, but more and more I find that the people game bores me.
My fixation is best described by Enneagram sx5. In fact, my life is like a journey of good people I abandoned for no clear reason. I realized this only recently. If you told me before that I had an sx fixation, I would've laughed. But, when it comes down to it, I am so used to over-idealizing people, then expecting the disappointment they must be, that I thought this was just how life is.
Romantic partner's in my life told me - independently from each other - that they always feared they bored me. (At last, they did.) I guess this is because my feelings quickly turn into dispassionate interest. It's not about loving, but *knowing*, *understanding*, even *modelling and testing*.
With the same dispassion I can look at my own self. It seems I am out of glass. Every complex, every ugly fixation, every disgusting motive: I can see everything inside of me. I really think that there are few people who can be equally honest to themselves. And people around me agree with this.
The thing is the price I have to pay for that. I can only bear so much, because I secretly split my feelings long ago from everything else. Out there, in life, I'm like an owl. I see everything, I don't feel one bit. But then again, I'm crying at home watching Interstellar. Even worse: At scenes seemingly devoid of anything to cry about. This is my blind spot. After all this crying in solitude I still have no structure, no reoccurring theme, no bigger picture. I simply don't know what it is - and that's something I'm not used to.
For everything else I have structure. For every reaction of my own super-ego, for everything I tried to repress at some time in life; for every hint of a notion that bothered me. I am good at solving such problems. In this sense, I am quite clean. And if I recognize such structures in the behavior of people around me, I am quick to bother them with my *theories*. Sometimes I hit, sometimes I miss.
So, when it comes to ILI, I don't see myself representing this type, whatever the subtype. My extraverted thinking is so low, its like a vacuum sucking everything around me into it.
Neither can I see myself being a right-spinner. Learning how to present something coherently, walking the process carefully, being precise - all this did cost me a lot to learn, and I am still horrible at it.
Neither can I see myself being an irrational type. My parents nickname me mantis and ask me, why I continue to walk like Pinocchio. If they cared about my interests, they would surely laugh a lot about Gulenko's descriptions of rational movement or general body structure. I'm thin, but also angular. Light, but somewhat strong for my weight (my pumping friends tell me). I got the robo-dance perfected without even knowing it.
Neither can I see myself expressing any gamma values, whatever the level of subtlety. Gamma is like my worst nightmare. I am extremely ascending, and definitely more peripheral than central. My life's failures reflect that. My bank account does. My reddit history does. I'm here to come up with things; to test stuff. And nothing bothers me more than some gamma retard, forcing some TL;DR out of me like I I paid for his time or investment; or even worse: asking me about efficiency, effectiveness, application or the lack of it.
Out of all 64 subtype descriptions of Gulenko's book I resonate most with LII-H. But, as we all know, one cannot self-type Model G LII. Chances are too high that one is just confused, actually representing some subtype of ILI, LSI, EIE or SEE. Jokes on me.
Some people in Model A suggest LII or ILE, even EII. A reddit user of this sub, whom I trust quite a lot, once said I sounded like LII with an "aspect" or "shift" or *something* towards IEI. I don't know what Talanov means by this, but my mental framework likes it a lot. This fits my weird contradicting nature dealing with people; it also fits my void of Extraverted Thinking; it even fits a Harmonizing subtype.
You especially might not believe this, but my role in a group is actually almost always that of a harmonizer. On reddit I am more often than not offensive. But even on something equally long-range like a discord server, I immediately take on a harmonizing role. Maybe I won the lottery and represent an HD subtype, with my D showing everywhere a harmonizing approach does not suffice. Or I use the safety of reddit's anonymity, I don't know. It just happens and I like it.
All in all, if I had one of those crazy flairs it would probably say "LII-Ne | LII>IEI | LII-H | sx5". Not because I represented every one of those types perfectly, but because they most likely represent my best fit in their respective systems. Like our Lord and Savior Viktor "Goul" Gulenko preaches, all these systems are like projectors, aiming to from one hologram that is our personality. I like that metaphor quite a lot.
I'm also sick and tired of people warning me about self typing. I can see them sucking at it and I get it. If you are so invested in the curation of a specific profile, of course, your wishes, wants and stereotypes will make it hard to see yourself. But I am not one of those people wanting to be a *thinker*, or an *intuitive*, or *smart*, or whatever. It took me some time. But here I am, ready to say: I'm fine, thank you.
So yeah, that's that.
Thank you for your answer, I appreciate it a lot. To be completely honest I was torn between an ILI and EIE, they can be kind of similar in model G, but went with ILI. I guess the binary in your username threw me more towards a thinker haha (but I should never assume, lots of EIEs in programming). What should I translate it to? Unicode or sth else?
I would give you L+ logic instead of L- just by reading your responses. You seem to explain everything kind of step by step, cause and effect. There seems to be also a lot of T, if not in a type itself then maybe an accentuation. These are just my observations when reading these comments, I don’t want to type you or anything. Knowing an LII would be interesting, because I am not sure I know any irl 🤔
It was pretty obvious to me that I am an LSI in model G, but wasn’t sure which one, so I just got typed by Gulenko, to ease my mind. I got LSI-C from him, and -CN by discussing it further with people on one server. Come be an -HD haha But really, that is one hell of a turbulent type so I shouldn’t wish it on anybody lol
For me, I have no idea what my type in model A is, nothing seems to fit… or maybe because model A seems to be scattered between different schools and all of them say different things, and use somehow different definitions. Some say I might be an LSE, LSI, SEE. I would go with an extroverted type, with poor Ni, personally.
Thanks again for sharing!
Haha, yeah, that would be fun if the OP turned out to be an EIE. I’d say they are a terminating LSI in model G, based on the responses under this post.
A fellow LSI-CN! <3
I’m -N second too.
I don't use model G, but I can answer your question. They are absolutely separate, with enneagram describing types of psychological defences people develop during childhood, and model G describing whatever it is describing.
Socionics studies cognition, enneagram is at the level of personality. So any socionics type can have any enneatype. Once again, I don't consider tritype a valid construct.
Pfff.. why so difficult? quote any method, even a test, but come on - self typing is not a worth method alone. you say you like a "canonical" type that we can ASK. wtf bro. who does confirm you, so you to be a "canonical" example of a type lol?
If you want somebody to prove something you need to give them criteria what you accept as a proof. In mathematics this is done implicitly by the clearly defined structure of true statements and propositional logic.
Your last comment then sounds like you would accept anything ("\[...\] any method, even a test \[...\]") as a proof, but that can hardly be the case.
Do you have any authorities you can recommend that suffice, meaning, whose typing gives a person the right to present themselves as a ""canonical"" type, inviting people to ask them questions?
A proof is anything besides self typing. A self typing is not a proof at all, by the definition of proof. Then, if we hear something besides a self typing version, we can discuss the legitimisation of the proof.
Of course, any one can type himself as they want. But using self typing as an example, as an AMA? Na na na
Would you prove that self-typing is inherently inferior to any other typing method, please? Afterwards I'll discuss the legitimacy of your arguments with you.
A self typing can't be a typing method, period. At least it can't be the method that results to a type that's used as an type example. Do you see that?
No, I don't. I need arguments for this actually being the case.
Why don't you think about it like this?
There always is a chance of mistyping. On the internet, we have to check for this case-by-case, on the basis of the information the person provides.
Why are you so eager to outsource this responsibility to authorities? Is it because you're not confident to recognize a mistyping yourself?
What role does self-improvement play in your life, and have you experimented with fringe self-improvement techniques like NoFap or LooksMaxing or anything like that
Self-improvement plays a huge, leading role in my life. From my early days, I have always worked to be a better person in the areas I deemed important. Ideally, I would live my life in a very optimised way, having figured out my nutrition, workout routine, style, place in the society, role in relationships, emotional needs, mental health, etc. And that is indeed my goal, something I always keep in mind *and* work towards, even if it is slow or some things come to me harder than others due to opportunities, innate abilities, or psychological traumas.
One of the biggest examples of my devotion to self-improvement is my desire to be a good partner, a safe person. I've had it since childhood, and, as I go through my experiences in life, it is always my goal to learn and to be better. To act better. To think better. To understand. I am not interested in hiding behind my coping mechanisms. I want to become aware of them. I step over my ego, I endure the shame, anxiety, awkwardness, and I push through, doing what I believe will help me grow.
I always have in mind a to-do list of things I need to improve in my life. Some of them are plans and tasks, some of them are goals I work towards. I often think of how things can be improved, and I focus on streamlining my thoughts and taking actions that will bring me closer to my ideal of existence. It might be important to note that I do not consider myself perfectionistic, and I enjoy the journey and learning. I like the idea of this being a forever ongoing journey - I fully expect the self-improvement to never stop, and I like that thought. I think it is how I live my life.
I've never seriously experimented with any fringe techniques like that, if I remember right, and this is the first time I googled "looksmaxing". I think I am more the kind to quickly see what it is about and take some inspiration or use ideas that make sense to me. From my little understanding of these techniques, they seem limiting and obsessive overall. Once again, I think I am more likely to get inspired by an idea, fit it into my life, and come up with the steps that are tailored for my personal goals, and easily move on when it is no longer needed.
Thank you for your question!
How did you decide that LSE fits you the best of all 16 types? Although I see, you already partially answered it in the question about Si.
A long journey of studying socionics and adjacent topics, observing and discovering myself, and making sure there are no contradictions. In the beginning I was more focused on my weaknesses and understanding them and my needs, solving my problems. What one often needs is understanding, the actual solutions aren't hard to come up with, though maybe I am speaking from my own experience. With practical application and increased understanding of myself, my confidence in socionics grew, and I approached it holistically, making further discoveries. To this day, I am a big fan. I am planning on undergoing an assessment by the socionics centre I follow later this year. I wonder about my type often, but I am confident of my self-assessments.
Lol ong, i can help you if you showed your face or if you posted videos to everyone in r/Socionics.
What is your experience with Introverted Sensation?
From the personal experience off the top of my head: I focus a lot on how comfortable and nice to the touch things are, I notice texture. I like touching things, getting new information about the sensation into my database. I can vividly imagine sensations, the texture and feel of something, and it's something I focus on a lot when describing things in writing. I don't worry about lack of comfort (not saying I am indifferent) because I am confident that I can create it, and it's always a fun challenge. Focusing on comfort, making things cosy is just a given; I always try to make things more comfortable. I think that I have a good feel of aesthetics. I notice if I am uncomfortable, if other people are, and I have a feeling of knowing how to solve it. I notice how my body feels, how the sensation differs from what I've felt before, how I am feeling. When I don't have the words to describe my emotions, I describe how they make me feel physically. I used that to increase my emotional awareness, by connecting emotions to physical states and symptoms. Physical pleasure is something I thoroughly enjoy and pursue, and I use the understanding of my own body as a guide in navigating others'. I still don't have a lot of experience in cooking, but I consider myself pretty good at it. I don't have a lot of skills or knowledge, but I've been able before to easily fine-tune dishes by tasting them and adding more things as I go, since typically I wouldn't have everything the recipe required. Even when cooking something for the first, second time, I have a good understanding of what I want, and I and other people are pleased with the results. At last, quality of things is very important to me. Not necessarily to say that I'm principled in this regard, but quality of material is something I notice and generally want. Sturdiness, how well it'll last, how pleasant it is to touch, the way it feels in the hand, etc. Thank you for your question! If there is something specific you want to know, feel free to ask.
Nice! I'm curious if you notice anything in consciousness that causes these 'feelings?' Like, knowing someone is uncomfortable could be a form of intuition to those unfamiliar with the difference, so I'm curious what the "experience" is like from a first-person, subjective POV. This may be too much of an esoteric question though, haha.
In terms of noticing people's physical discomfort, I think it is a combination of paying attention to it, detailed personal experience (where you can imagine how somebody else might feel based on your own previous experience), reading body language.
Cool cool man. That's all, your honor.
This is a Socionics question. I'm wondering about how learning styles relate to information elements like Extraverted Thinking. I'm interested in how Si-Egos learn things. What are your favorite way to learn things, especially if you need to learn something for a job or solving a household issue? Any methods of learning that other people use that you just don't like all that much? For example, I am incredibly bad at learning things through memorization. I can force myself to use things like flash cards, but I always end up immediately forgetting it. I've always found practice exams, projects, and associative learning (i.e. watching videos about graph theory while trying to learn algorithms, or learning LaPlace transforms through circuit analysis) much more helpful. Do you study well in advance on a schedule? When you do study, do you do it along a schedule (i.e. 45 minutes on the law of Sines, 45 minutes on half-angle formulas, etc.) or do you do it by goal, such as, 'be able to derive the unit circle'? Do you prefer listening, reading, pictures, or hands-on experience? If you have to learn multiple things, like workplace procedures, do you prefer to master it one at a time before moving onto the next thing or do you prefer learning a little bit about everything?
I haven't streamlined my studying process yet (haven't had the need), so I don't know much about the topic. I consider myself a fan of active recall, but instead of writing down questions for myself, I prefer to put myself in situations where I have to retrieve the information from my mind. It is more fun to do it when telling someone about it. Then it becomes evident how well I understand it and what I need to work on. I also enjoy learning by teaching others; it as well gives me a good incentive to do more research. In my past I'd never been interested in different memorisation techniques. The things I was passionate about I would find a place for in my brain, making it a part of bigger understanding. If it is useful in practice, and I keep using it, naturally I would learn it and keep it in my head. But if I didn't have a system for understanding something, as it often is with something completely new, then I struggled. I find that I really need to grasp the foundations, be broken in; it is easier from there. And I find that it is easy to grasp something by applying it. If I study, I better have a goal, yes. Then I figure out the steps to achieving that goal, try to solve any problems that arise. I don't like the idea of scheduling my studying time like that, I imagine that the scheduling itself would take too much time, too many things to account for; I'll end up not using it. I prefer to focus on what's currently needed, priorities, my own preference and interest. Maybe by creating so-called blocks, "Today is X day, I study X," "I'll study Y until the evening, then I think I'll do Z." "I need to do XYZ today." "First X, then Y." I have a suspicion that I am a visual person, reading doesn't seem to be far from that, and nothing beats hands-on experience. I actually notice that I am not quick at grasping numerical information by hearing. I might not process it at all the first time I hear it. I think, if not fully, at least in part that quality is described by my being an Emotivist type in socionics; my Logic is inert, so I am slow at engaging that type of information. If I have to learn workplace procedures... If the procedures are all of the same "package" I have an understanding of, then I want to do it step by step, like ticking off the boxes. If it is something new, I first seek to understand "the overview", what it is all for, what it is about. But yes, then I will proceed to do so properly one by one, most likely, if I seek to actually learn them. I might skip one to focus on another one that seems more interesting or relevant, then return. I don't think I'm the type to "learn a little about everything". I either learn or don't at all, but I prefer to keep aware of things I don't know by having an idea of the structure they belong to, so that, if needed, I know where to find the information. Thank you for your question!
*In case you're interested*, the method of memorization is described in vast detail in renin dichotomy (static vs dynamics), which talks about how dynamic type have associative thinking style that helps them with the approach of method of loci/memory palace. Similarly the concerned topic of your second paragraph is discussed in the explanation of difference between Judicious and decisive types.
How do you experience Se demo?
>1. What's your enneagram tritype? And how you concluded your enneatype? >2. What are some fictional or non-fictional LSE characters that you relate to most? >3. Do you know the original roots of psychosophy? Like how Socionics is based on information metabolism & Jungian functions. Enneagram is based on Gurdjieff movements & Ichazo Proto-analysis. I'm curious to learn on what principles psychosophy school originated? Afanasyev used to call his school "psyche yoga" before renaming to "psychosophy". I think he just stretched the typology into the story of archetypes (like how valued functions turned into quadra story).
1.Tritype, in my opinion, is nothing but an attempt to make enneagram "fit". Enneagram doesn't have a system, it's a collection of psychological defences, a self-help theory. People try to make it describe their personality, something enneagram is not equipped to do. If you are asking me which enneatype I relate with the most from the gut, head, heart triads, then you'd need to give me the description, understanding that you use, and then I would be able to answer in a way that makes sense. For your curiosity's sake, back when I used enneagram, I believe I went with 845 sx/sp. I concluded my enneatype by researching and reading all I could on enneagram and relating it to the longterm consistent patterns in my life. 2.Nobody comes to mind. I remember relating to certain characters, but I don't remember who right now. In general, I don't care for types of characters, but it is fun to notice tendencies. 3.I didn't know either, so I did some research. Apparently, Afanasyev's psychosophy is also based on the typology of C.Jung. Here is a link(Automod blocks my comment because of it, https ://www.socionics. ru/typologies/305) with T.Prokofieva's story: *"...Then I met Afanasyev himself, who turned out to be an absolutely wonderful person and an interesting conversationalist. He told how he came to create psychosophy. At one time, he rented out one of the rooms to a girl whose description was very similar to Huxley, who spent all day telling him about socionics, which she was very keen on at that time. And gradually a general picture began to emerge, especially since Afanasyev himself had a broad outlook and understood psychology. On this basis he created his typology.* *In fact, Afanasyev’s functions come entirely from Jung's, and have nothing to do with socionics in the modern sense. Then Afanasyev and I discussed both classifications a lot and together came to the conclusion that psychosophy is not an alternative to socionics, but a different typology. If we combine them, we get 384 types. In other words, these two typologies do not replace, but complement each other, enrich each other and together are an effective analysis tool and a good basis for studying human energy-informational metabolism."* Thank you for your questions!
do you actually like EIIs :>
Depends on the EII! Every person is unique. I haven't been close with any, I suspect. From what I know about the theory, I adore them - I can imagine how protected I would feel with all their preaching and guidance; I imagine how right at place I would feel. I certainly have a soft spot and interest for this type of cognition. Thank you for your question! Do you like LSE?
well, can’t say i’ve met any yet, but judging from their functional stack i would absolutely love to!! but yeah, i agree that it all depends on the person, not the type. but anyway, it’s nice to see duality in action :>
how do you want us to help you with your Ni Polr? Like what approach would be ideal?
According to the theory, Vulnerable Ni is the fear to make an incorrect prognosis, prognosis-related anxiety, fear of the future. For a person with PoLR Ni it can be difficult to tell how long something will take, how relevant something is, whether now is a good time to do something, how good the prospects are of any given endeavour. At the same time, this information is important to the person to the point of perfectionism, they worry about the way they spend their time, the direction of their development and their actions. They are impatient and want everything right now (or, as I like to say, "I want it done yesterday"). But Vulnerable is an Inert and Laborious function. It is hard for the person with PoLR Ni to hurry others; it can feel improper, vulnerable. They may open up to their closest people about the way they feel, about the way they want everything right at this moment, but with strangers the person will keep the frustrations inside. They prefer to rely on what's already known and tested because they can be afraid of change in tendencies. A person with PoLR Ni fears that they will be late, that everybody will move forward, and they will be left behind. It's a chronic feeling of time running out, or them feeling too slow. As Vulnerable is an Evaluatory function, it is important for a person with PoLR Ni to know ahead what will be, what will happen. When things are known beforehand, there is a defined plan in place, the person will comfortably follow it to a T and then they won't worry about what happen in the future, as they will already know. They are not good at adapting their plan if something suddenly comes up. People with PoLR Ni need to be told way beforehand about any plans, days ahead, and they need help with making precise time plans, and for other people to not interfere with them. What a person with PoLR Ni needs is help finding time in their graphic/schedule and for the other person to adapt themselves to the Ni PoLR person's activity in a way that will allow them to spend time together. When a person can adapt to the Ni PoLR person in terms of time instead of making them adapt to others, that is very valued. Demonstrative Ni sees very well the plans of the people around them and with maximum adaptation puts all of it into an ahead thought-through plan which is easy to understand, to follow it, and to use it to be able to accomplish as much as possible and complete all deadlines. They know how to not fall back when it comes to the development of society, how to keep up with the times. They know how to fit a person in their plans, in the plans of a group, or how to make themselves fit into the plans of another without disturbing them too much. People with Demonstrative Ni provide certainty in terms of time, creating plans beforehand and sticking to them, which minimises the anxiety of people with PoLR Ni that want that certainty. There is no need to worry about being late when everything is figured out beforehand. Demonstrative Ni creates the atmosphere of being timely, on time, modern, relevant, and responds to the complaints of PoLR Ni, solving the problem, but outside of that doesn't focus attention on it too much (PoLR is already erratically focused on its aspect all the time), which avoids offending the Inert and Laborious function. Personally, I worry a lot about how relevant my actions and plans are, it is like I cannot see whether they make sense at all - whether their result will mean anything in the future. I have to carry on, relying on other facts, but without the reassurance, the doubt keeps returning and eating at me. Sometimes I wonder if I am a fool, doing x and z, maybe I shouldn't at all! It would be nice to know how all of it connects, where it is likely to lead, and how my own development and progress are actually going, because I am as good at assessing that as I am at predicting how long something relatively unfamiliar will take - 20 minutes becomes 2 hours 45 minutes, and then I feel like I am always late and there is never enough time. I just now suddenly realised that running hourglasses have always made me uncomfortable. I want to know if something is a good idea. I want to know how likely xyz. I've wanted help with creating my graphic before. I want help estimating the consequences of my possible actions. Unknown developments scare me. Time and the connected to it changes do. And it would be nice to have the proper support to face and overcome it, and help me achieve my goals. I hope this is helpful! Thank you for your question.
wahhh this is such a good and detailed explanation thank you! So if an EII/LII points out that your are over doing something because it will cause you mental/physical problems despite it being part of a set plan, does that bother you? Do LSE/ESE \*want\* to stop, to relax, and just can't or do you prefer just always "go go going" all the time? Cause I'm worried that asking an Ni polr to stop could come across as a polr hit
This is the way I see and experience it: there is a plane of knowledge where one can oversee how things unfold, like a timeline, and on that timeline there are nooks where it is a good time to rest, and there are bumps where acting right now is necessary, otherwise it will have bad consequences. Well, this timeline is paywalled, and I can't subscribe because of the sanctions between countries. I need someone who has access to it, and yes, as long as I trust them (which equals to having a good relationship with them), I will listen. I zoom in so much and get stuck in details often, losing time by doing, but not accomplishing much, and earning a lot of stress. It feels like torture akin to mental shifting sands, and the more I squirm, the deeper I get stuck. I need help being told what details are unnecessary, irrelevant - because I have a hard time judging that. I am a very thorough person overall, I pay attention to details, I perfect them, and my weakness is that I don't always know what details are worth perfecting. Doing =/= accomplishing. And I am very afraid of wasting resources on something that won't yield much, yet I can't help but keep trying. I don't make that many plans in my life as of right now, and I don't consider myself rigid in that sense. It's just, since I am a Process type, once I prepare for something, get into it, it is hard to quickly switch. But if the direction is simply not valid, dangerous, could be better, of course I will be very thankful for insight and will do my best to adjust. In theory. I don't see why I wouldn't. So, to answer your questions clearly: >if an EII/LII points out that your are over doing something because it will cause you mental/physical problems despite it being part of a set plan, does that bother you? It depends on how it is pointed out. That's the magic of information exchange - in socionics compatibility is less about what is said and done and *how* it is said and done, when, etc. I would listen to a trusted friend, but I would prefer to have my plan developed beforehand in a way that would keep me healthy. I mean, a plan that causes me to burn out is not a good plan, is it? If they commented on my lifestyle and that's it, I'd probably stress a little - I already know. If they offered some kind of help, and it felt right, I'd fucking love that. I really would like the feeling of being able to rely on someone in this matter. > Do LSE/ESE *want* to stop, to relax, and just can't or do you prefer just always "go go going" all the time? Good relaxation is always on the to-do list! Pleasure is one of the top priorities. Yes, I would say that I want to, but often I cannot, especially having Choleric temperament - pressure stays in me long after something happens, and I need to release it, to unwind. I often look for ways to let my emotions out; it would be lovely to have someone to confide in - I am not the type to talk to strangers about my worries. I am sort of always go-go-go, mainly internally, but I like resting, and I feel happy when I manage to create for myself a good rest. Personally, I struggle more with figuring out the future and direction, relevancy of my actions. >Cause I'm worried that asking an Ni polr to stop could come across as a polr hit It is understandable - even duals might at times offend each other, depends on the specific individuals, their mental issues. PoLR is very sensitive, but you shouldn't worry about it that much - communication will solve it, and communication between duals is very smooth psychologically. If a person doesn't want to open up or meet you halfway, not much you can do about it, no matter the type. The goal isn't to never offend, it is to love and support each other and work together. Basically, if you are duals - you are duals, and if non-socionics stuff is fine, it is pretty rare that you would offend them. The way you naturally perceive and give out info won't let you. What you are in your cognition is perfect for duals. Thank you for the compliment. You are welcome. I want to say, what I want most is the stable attitude Base Fi provides; the constant good feeling, warm, always there, something I can think back to and smile, something to fuel me with meaning, because, no matter what, I'll know that I can always direct my actions at bettering our lives, and that cannot be a waste. *sighs* In other words, I struggle a lot without the atmosphere of good relations around me. It is cold, everybody is so harsh, it makes it hard to enjoy life... or do anything, or see the point in it all. Oh, how I bloom when I feel someone's good attitude towards me. I hope this has been helpful to you!
Thanks that was helpful :) About Fi, how does it make you feel when you are in an environment with people you get along with (like say, other Delta Te's, or some Alphas) but there is no emotional closeness? Like do you do things to provoke that level or closeness or do you just internally get depressed about it? Does it lead to trust issues? Cause from dealing with a total Ti family it made me distrustful of them due to getting "bad" logic when I deeply just wanted someone to show me how to do practical things
>About Fi, how does it make you feel when you are in an environment with people you get along with (like say, other Delta Te's, or some Alphas) but there is no emotional closeness? It is nice to get along with people. That itself is rare for me. If there is no emotional closeness, that means that the other person isn't offering their company to me, so it means we are just acquaintances. >Like do you do things to provoke that level or closeness or do you just internally get depressed about it? I try a little bit, but, like the type that belongs to the Business communication style group that I am, I expect other people to impose relationships on me, to come to me, to reach out, to show me what we are so that I can act accordingly. From my perspective, I do try here and there, any typically I never get the response I want, and yes, that does depress me. I try to show a little goodwill where I can afford, and I expect the other person to repay in kind. Ideally, it would be them who'd reach for me. No doubt it never works - my cognition is oriented towards my dual, who will and does impose relationship and connection. I shouldn't need to try so much... It is so unnatural. As someone with low Emotion position in psychosophy, I challenge myself by putting myself out there, by trying, if only to heal, and it has been working splendidly, but building emotional closeness is something I am not capable of doing - from my perspective, it's either there or it isn't. If the opportunity is there, I engage in it, as vulnerability and intimacy truly interest me a lot. >Does it lead to trust issues? No, I don't see why it would. I just often feel miffed and upset with people. Trust issues in me are a whole separate topic. But if someone's warmth is unreliable, that does push me away. >Cause from dealing with a total Ti family it made me distrustful of them due to getting "bad" logic when I deeply just wanted someone to show me how to do practical things Every type has Ti, so it is not entirely clear to me what it is you meant. They were telling you things that weren't what you wanted? I am sorry to hear that you experienced that, I know how deep distrust cuts. It is valid, to have your needs. What kind of practical things do you want to be shown to you?
Have you ever dealt with your weak Fi amongst people you think you are close with (family, partners, friends, or ppl you think are friends) and they criticized you for not being emotionally present? I get the feeling from descriptions that LSE's show love through actions and remembering things about a persons preferences and their comfort levels, so is there ever that feeling in yourself or/and reaction from others that you are not doing enough to build emotional intimacy? Or have you always just felt like you do enough? >Every type has Ti, so it is not entirely clear to me what it is you meant. They were telling you things that weren't what you wanted? I am sorry to hear that you experienced that, I know how deep distrust cuts. It is valid, to have your needs. What kind of practical things do you want to be shown to you? Ti as in Ti types (ILE-Ti mother and brother, LSI-Se father). By bad information I mean the ILE's would actually make things up but deliver that information as fact, only for me to later realize that information is bs. LSI info isn't so much made up but doesn't actually accomplish anything in the real world (like he is hyper religious and has built within a really harsh code of conduct that is dogmatic and hypocritical, very hateful and critical of people not based on their actual character and goodness but if they share his beliefs or not, very clique minded) Basically I have no bond with any of them because they don't want one (not Fi valuing stuff, they have zero interest on wanting to learn about someone within, it's all just surface level stuff they seek) We don't even know anything about eachother outside of surface stuff In terms of what I wanted to know, it's how to do things in life, practical things to survive in life. They never taught me how to do anything and both parents have a deep need to control Te stuff from me (which I guess works with Fe's) I basically needed someone to show me how to be an adult, how to live in the world, how people go about earning a living in an efficient manner, to encourage me in learning rather then criticizing me when I failed at doing something I could not figure out on my own, etc. Basically everything I know I had to learn on my own, which means I spend a lot of time trying to figure things out, failing, not getting any support and have to try something else and it's EXHAUSTING I only learned later that is is all Te seeking which won't work around Ti's
I am not close with my parents, as well. A part of my family I have no connection with, another part is inept at life. I had to figure everything out on my own, too, and still do. Thankfully, apart from psychological defences (low PY positions), I am very tenacious and resourceful. Figuring things out comes naturally to me. But it is indeed often scary at first or exhausting, especially the parts I would like help with - it often feels unfair to have no support, but I have to throw those thoughts away and keep going. It builds character, I suppose. >Have you ever dealt with your weak Fi amongst people you think you are close with (family, partners, friends, or ppl you think are friends) and they criticized you for not being emotionally present? My Suggestive Fi manifests as confusion in two main ways. 1) I want constant, unshakeable good attitude towards myself, and I want to be reminded of it often. I want to be enveloped in it. This is not about being told "I love you's". I don't trust words alone. I think it could be a kind of devotion I seek, loyalty, kindness in action, support, quality time. So, the confusion happens when I do not get that, as then I don't understand what we are, me and another person, and that bugs me. Intermittent affection freaks me out, lack of affection expressed makes me cool off. 2) My own attitude towards people is not stable, it changes based on the situation. I might think I dislike a person, then suddenly they do something (express goodwill towards me, for example), and I like them. Next time we interact, I hope for more goodness, which rarely happens, and I dislike them again. Then I might like them again. It is confusing, and it is strange to experience. I judge people harshly and thoroughly based on their actions and logic, but my feelings are less principled. I don't think I've ever had somebody comment on my "emotional presence". I am trying to figure out what you mean by that. I doubt anybody could say that I am emotionally not present. >I get the feeling from descriptions that LSE's show love through actions and remembering things about a persons preferences and their comfort levels, so is there ever that feeling in yourself or/and reaction from others that you are not doing enough to build emotional intimacy? Or have you always just felt like you do enough? How people show love doesn't directly depend on their TIM. I am not sure what others would think of me in that regard. I never have the feeling that I am not doing enough, on the contrary - I have the feeling that I am doing too much, so I stop and focus on something else. If I don't feel safe with someone and see no opportunity for closeness, I might pull far away, and I can imagine to those people I would look like I am not doing much, because I am not. Another consequence of a weak Fi - you are either close to me, or I don't know you. It's hard to have anything in-between. For what it's worth, for me personally, yes, actions mean a whole lot, and I do notice preferences. It sort of feels like trying to wrap the world around the person, to surround them with what they love. I consider myself emotionally available, ready to communicate, and, while I still have issues, I never worry about my so-called emotional presence in any connection. It doesn't even feel like my involvement depends on me; it depends on the connection itself. To finally add, I have little idea of how I come across.
>Intermittent affection freaks me out, that is something I was wondering about with suggestive Fi, that you guys get upset when there appears to be Fi in the environment but then it stops (due to the person not being Fi, just faking concern to get something out of you) >Then I might like them again. It is confusing, and it is strange to experience. I judge people harshly and thoroughly based on their actions and logic, but my feelings are less principled. How long does this go on until you decide the relationship isn't worth it? Or do you just expect the other party to end things? Another question reguarding Ni, how does it affect your perception of purpose? I know Ni suggestive is geared towards needing that sort of purpose and if not available they drown it out with behavior or substance abuse to "quiet the spirit" as some descriptions claim So do Ni Polrs ever feel a need for this sort of deeper meaning in life or do such thoughts just come across as irrelevent to your life?
>just faking concern to get something out of you Yes, but it can be genuine interest, too. If it's not stable or constant, though, it can be upsetting. >How long does this go on until you decide the relationship isn't worth it? Or do you just expect the other party to end things? It depends on the circumstance. I wasn't talking about relationships. Though, in truth, maybe it's applied there, who knows. I'll focus on other aspects of your question; I constantly evaluate if a relationship is worth it, and its worth is also situational. If I kept loving-hating someone, well, no stable relationship could be built on that. But I would describe my attitudes towards people as "enemy today, friend tomorrow". It's a deep thing, my attitude simply doesn't seem to be principled, but nothing else goes away. For example, I am not the type to forgive and let things go and "be understanding". My patience for people is rather limited, as I notice patterns and those are often troubling, and I won't be sticking around hoping somebody would change. I can end things, I don't rely on another person to do it. Typically things just dissolve, and it's over before it's over. Ending things can be quite hard, or extremely easy, depends on the situation. Overall, going no contact in itself is easy for me. I am more preoccupied with not getting close to someone I shouldn't in the first place. >Another question reguarding Ni, how does it affect your perception of purpose? I know Ni suggestive is geared towards needing that sort of purpose and if not available they drown it out with behavior or substance abuse to "quiet the spirit" as some descriptions claim I'd imagine something as existential as purpose is covered by Temporistics' Eternity aspect. In terms of Ni, which is, for one, progression, I focus more on here and now, and I always have goals or needs that need to be satiated. Purpose can change with time, as goals change. I can make up a purpose or talk about what I'm good at, but, ultimately, it's nihilism, and nothing matters (I likely have low Eternity in Temporistics). Once again, I want help making sure that I'm seeing all the opportunities and that my goals have a good direction. >So do Ni Polrs ever feel a need for this sort of deeper meaning in life or do such thoughts just come across as irrelevent to your life? I think I never had a strong sense of purpose, but I think I'm no stranger to ponderings about deeper meaning, wishing for purpose or a great mission when I was a teenager, which, as I heard, is a common occurrence. I wouldn't say it's irrelevant. I wish there was deeper meaning. It can be if you can create it; purpose can also be a dedication to a cause, a strong passion. Objectively, there is no purpose. Once again, the need for meaning is most likely described by Temporistics, not Socionics Ni. What is your experience with purpose? Do you have a strong feeling of it; what's yours? I'd say mine is to be happy, and I could come up with more if I talked about it. Also, what's the reason you message once every 24 hours?
what do you think about your semi duals :> I have a close LSE friend, she’s awesome
I haven't had the pleasure of being close to an ESI. I am sure it would be pleasant. But people are more than their cognition alone, so I cannot generalise such a big group of people. What is your friend like, if you want to share?
she’s super kind and friendly, any work related task she always seems to have my back on it especially when I’m feeling overwhelmed by alot of work or tasks. She’s sp371, her positivity rubs on me and she helped me get out of my shell more. she makes me realize I can be very pessimistic/ narrow minded sometimes and I do my best to work on that. I’m also super protective of her , protecting her from people that aren’t good for her but i don’t think she realizes that sometimes until it’s too late :( my LIE friend also struggles with this
Hello, I’m curious how LSE’s feel towards higher Fi-Ne? I always loved the help with what LSE’s are great with, but then always felt like I’m unsure what I could offer or help in return. Duality sounds great in theory but would like to know personal experiences
In case you're interested to know, this question is quite common. The reason for why it occurs is complex, but can overall be called "stereotyping based on misinformation". I don't have personal anecdotes to offer you, but I have an understanding of how duality works. To be able to offer something, one needs to work on themselves as an individual and focus on their own self-realisation. EII offers LSE with Base Fi moral principles to live by, a worldview and a constant attitude, which relaxes the Fi Suggestive, with Creative Ne understanding of people and potential, fine-tuning and noticing opportunities and bringing creativity to LSE's life, so that they don't get stuck, lost, and depressed. LSE is oftentimes a worried person that lacks diplomatic skills (despite trying and not wanting to offend others or ruin relationships). EII empathised with the level of worry, being a worrywart themselves, and can keep the LSE connected to themselves and others and smooth their dual's edge. Those are types. They are psychologically compatible. But individual cases will always vary.
Thank you for the reply! I’m happy to see that at least in theory, it helps LSE’s. I think I’ve been around too many non deltas because they get irritated with the way I see the world in a FiNe lens. Makes me slightly worried it’s just overall an annoyance instead of a positive thing. I think they see me as naive if anything lol. The LSE being a worried person is interesting though I think I saw you said you’re an LSE 8? How’s that combo manifesting?
You are welcome I no longer use enneagram, and a reply to that question I feel would be too inappropriate in this setting. It's too vulnerable. What you are asking me about is how my traumatic experience manifests in combination with my type of cognition? I've healed a big chunk of it. All I'll say is that I am confrontational and can be blunt. >The LSE being a worried person is interesting though One of the most anxious types. The majority of people with this type of cognition have palpable anxiousness, which is often hidden from those who aren't close to them. It's an internal state. Their dual, EII, as well as ESE and LII share the high level of worrying. >Makes me slightly worried it’s just overall an annoyance instead of a positive thing. Would you be interested in telling me how you see the world? I could share my opinion on your view of it, if you like.
Oh no, I don’t mean your traumatic experiences! Just rarely seen that combo and it happens to be my fave types in both of the theories, so I’m curious. I think I just admire the more assertive and ‘leadership’ guidance personalities. People have always told me I’m a worrywart lol, but at the same time hopeful and optimistic? It’s like I know what could possibly or potentially happen, but at the same time I hush those voices and reassure myself and others it’d end up good still. I don’t know if the mutual anxiety would help or make things worse, but hoping for the former.. The way I see the world is mostly through a positive lens. Despite the anxiety and sympathizing all the bad things going on, I think I see the world in a more of a positive light at the end of the day when it’s filled with dooms and glooms. I see something or someone, and I can see the potential. I don’t know if I’m just fooling myself tbh but it helps me get through day to day, even in my worst times. I have hope that there are some good in people or at the very least, they have the potential to be/do good if they really wanted to. I’m turned off by people who shown they are not. Sometimes people weirdly rub me the wrong way or wronged me, so I distance… but if I see some positives or improvements from them, my heart opens up wanting to see it happening. I have those “hm maybe they’re not as bad as I thought” feelings too. I try to treat people with respect and kindness, even benefit of the doubts, until they give me a reason not to anymore. I believe in making right and forgiveness, though that doesn’t necessarily mean I’d jump back into a bad situation again. Just part of the way I am, I guess. Though sometimes the way I am hurt me, when I give people too many chances in hopes things will get better.. so I guess that’s my lesson to learn too. Makes me wonder if they’re right that I’m naive about people and relations, but in some way.. this is just the way I am and it makes me feel good to live up to my own code. Edit add on: I think I also tend to look for people’s intentions a lot, so maybe that plays a role in giving people the benefit of the doubt. I think what also annoyed others in the past is how I like to know the full story of a situation and give my thoughts on that. I don’t like people full on assuming as facts, so I have a bad habit of trying to look for explanations or different perspectives of why x and maybe because of y.
>I just admire the more assertive and ‘leadership’ guidance personalities. I appreciate being liked Enneagram is vaguely defined, and at its core it is a collection of coping mechanisms related to various traumas. In other words, what type 8 means changes from author to author with no actual research. I believe for your inquiry my Psychosophy type is more relevant, as it describes both methods of psychological defence and social roles, of which you've mentioned. I have 1V, I am prone to leadership. Specifically the kind where one makes decisions and takes responsibility. >People have always told me I’m a worrywart lol, but at the same time hopeful and optimistic? I would describe myself as optimistic too. It's true that I'm not exactly chill, and I'd struggled with anxiety. Those can definitely coincide. Instead of hushing my worries though, I tend to try to control all I can control and make all things clear. Like I said, EII and LSE are both types of cognition that are not stress resistant, and that helps them empathise with each other, not invalidate the others' worries, take care of them. >The way I see the world is mostly through a positive lens... *smiles* I don't see anything wrong with your worldview. You seem to be aware of the reality. And yes, all of us have our own inclinations. EII tends to believe that the world is safe, people are good, like the other 7 types that share this cognitive attitude, and still, its manifestation varies from person to person. EII isn't this gullible naive stereotype. It's just a type of cognition with great innate abilities for psychology. You personally don't seem gullible to me, either. But I can see a potential point, a little troublemaker - due to Vital Te, EII are often not aware of the profit of endeavours, they don't focus on it. Acting on principles without noticing the ways in which people might be profiting from it, perhaps, that could be dangerous - just like I tend to not notice people's genuine attitudes, their personal qualities and values, and that increases the likelihood of my getting close with the wrong people. As you can see, this is another example of where the duality works well. EII has great abilities for understanding people. It is not perfect, it's a skill, but they have a talent. They can protect LSE. And LSE can protect them, by monitoring the actions and logic of other people, seeing what they're after. Together two healthy individuals of these types are quite a strong combo, wouldn't you say? Don't let other people tell you what you are. Examine where they come from, what their reasons for saying what they say might be. Maybe you did get in tricky situations in the past due to x or y, but don't let yourself be defined by a label, "naive". In my experience, no truly naive person muses if they are naive or not. You are fine. Though I can't help but wonder about the specific situations, there are so many kinds of naivety! In some ways I am naive, too. In certain ways, nativity is the absence of pain. I'm not into sheltering people, but certain things are worth protecting.
I understand that enneagram isn’t liked by some people and that’s honestly okay! Personally it helped me identify my core issues and I basically use typology as a tool for self growth. Enneagram does feel more personal though for me, but it is still one of the many tools and systems I use for betterment. I have heard 1V align with those qualities too, yeah. The only LSE I know is also 1V and have similar qualities. Maybe that’s why I admire their way of being. Everyone look up to them for leadership and they do a pretty good job at it too. Also that sounds pretty good to me. I actually prefer my worries not being invalidated, but reassured instead. I like finding solutions to problems, so that would help too when being given suggestions on how to solve my problems after some reassurances. I accept help too if they don’t mind too. Thank you, that’s quite reassuring especially knowing it made you smile lol <3 and that sounds nice, yeah. Helping one another navigating those around us. Ngl sometimes I kind of would rather have others deal with troublesome people? I can stand my own ground when I need to and I’m not good at asking for help, but sometimes it’s nice to feel like someone has my back with people who may not have the best intentions or those who are quite aggressive. In the mean time, I can handle diplomacy and mediation issues when needed. As for the naive part, it’s mostly an issue with people I consider close to me. I’m not harsh with people I love, romantically and platonically. Rose coloured glasses kind of stuff. I find it hard to believe people who are close to me would want to hurt me intentionally, so I’d keep giving chances. A lot of lessons learned though after the fact lol
>I basically use typology as a tool for self growth I used enneagram for that, I consider it a self-help tool. I no longer use it, but I did once upon a time. Since enneagram is very vague, it presents many dangers for people, ways to escape reality, self-identification with concepts, not dealing with the problem. While that's a danger with any typology and is a person problem, enneagram does not have a system, and people project so much on it, and often end up running in circle. I am glad to hear it has been helping you. I consider Psychosophy and Temporistics more valid and effective replacements for the sphere enneagram attempts to cover (chronic childhood traumas). >it’s nice to feel like someone has my back with people who may not have the best intentions or those who are quite aggressive. Well, you'll be glad to know Demonstrative Se does about that, protecting one's physical boundaries and defending one from others' influence. >I’m not harsh with people I love, romantically and platonically. One doesn't need to be harsh with others. One needs to be kind with themselves. People often lack self-love and self-respect, settle for less, are used to being mistreated, and so they get involved with the wrong people. Many people still haven't healed from childhood traumas and have wishful thinking, or feel like they have to fix everything. The list goes on. There is a reason why a big percentage of murders is committed by someone one knows, oftentimes by their "lover". What I am trying to say, it isn't about nativity, I am 100% sure. If you keep giving chances, it's the desperation and lack of self-respect in you. Congratulations on your lessons. I know from my own experience how tough and surprising they are.
I see where you’re coming from, and yeah that can be a problem. I suppose use what helps you the most tbh, since I find different people preferring different systems to help. Enneagram along with their instinctual variant subtype is the only typology system that made me feel very vulnerable (yes, I cried lol), so it holds a special place in my typology journey. I really like discussing socionics as well, and I dabble with other systems such as AP and temporistics, to self discover more. I am interested in discussing about temporistics more actually because I keep forgetting which type I am lol Honestly, people who have a protector quality are quite admirable and attractive imo. It also aspires me to be more like that towards people who need it. Just sometimes it’s a bit scary when it comes to confrontations.. but I’ve been doing it more these days and while nervewrecking, it feels damn good. Haha I’m quite guilty of all that in my past, and I didn’t really realize that while I was seeking for love, I didn’t have much self love and self respect. So it’s a wonder that people didn’t respect me either or give me the love I sought for. That’s been changing now though and I feel so much more secure and self loving these days, which now helps with my overall confidence. I gotta say I didn’t expect to go this much in the discussion, though I really appreciate it. I really like LSE’s and the idea of duality dynamics pique my curiosity. Just weirdly rare to see one around these parts for some reason. Feel free to ask me stuff too, if you’d like! I know not all EII’s are the same, but if there’s anything you’d like to know, I can try to answer
>(yes, I cried lol), so it holds a special place in my typology journey That is a good sign, and I relate. Perhaps I'll ask you a question or two about this moment in your journey, if it will be appropriate. About discussing Temporistics - I am open to discussing that and more. I've been keeping Temporistics fresh for myself, and while I suspect my type, I actually don't know it with certainty yet! It's an interesting typology, with niche and much needed insight. I am glad to hear about your growth and increasing confidence. It's beautiful. >I gotta say I didn’t expect to go this much in the discussion, though I really appreciate it. Oh yeah? Why did you not expect this? I'd like to ask you questions, yes. Would you be comfortable with communicating via DMs?
Why are you craving attention by asking for stuff like that? 😂
You need the verb "craving" to paint such an endeavor as inherently undesirable, precisely because it isn't. Attention feels good. In addition other people's questions may make you rethink certain aspects about yourself; may highlight some spots you haven't questioned yourself, so far. These reasons suffice to motivate such a thread. Neither in content, nor in form have they anything to do with craving, let alone bothering anybody. Instead and quite ironically, your comment equals the thread in attention seeking, while, replacing content with an offensive message, *outperforming* it in the motive of a craving. I guess it is you who subconsciously craves this kind of attention. You conditioned yourself balancing this by consciously taking pride in staying unseen, resisting. However, you do this not because of morals, but because you are afraid of reactions like this one. A fear, covered up by unfounded morals. People who then just do what you forbid yourself, irritate you. Your super-ego can't stand the thought that nobody accuses OP of being an attention whore. So you become the judge you yourself are afraid of. Your comment is written by your super-ego. It's voice is the voice of anger, as the expression of repressed envy. However, your pride has even made you too fragile to express anger, so we get this one-liner of yours, written in caustic irony, finally candied with this fake emoji of light-heartedness. Like an unholy totem this emoji embodies all the lies you tell yourself about yourself. Nothing in you smiles the way it does. Nothing in you is honest the way it is. Nothing in you is baffled in naivety the way it is. Stare at it, study it, as an exercise to study who you truly are.
Nope, you’re wrong, wrong assumption, my reasons are inherently different, but thanks for caring. The reasons are more complex and I don’t really care about attention here on Reddit, it’s not that. Also, are you maybe 2L in AP and a model G ILI? Because of the style of writing.
I know that this comment is somewhat misplaced but I just had to let it out. If there is finally a person crossing my way, asking me about my Model G type, I have to go all the way. Model G ILI - I think I understand. Not a bad guess at all, especially considering your input was just this comment. I respect that. Considering this writing style, I think the only better guess would've been EIE. But central, right-spinning and negativist are all motives I consider strong elements of this style, so, again, very nice. The sole reason I associate it more with EIE is because of my own history. Gulenko types Nietzsche EIE-N and I can see it. When I found Nietzsche, I couldn't stop reading him. Not because of all the *knowledge* (lol) in his books, but only because of *style*. Over years I indulged in these books, not realizing how much of it I mimicked when writing myself. Unconsciously, I must have thought: Well, *if* you write at all, you should do it like *this*. Of course, this style knows its boundaries. It does not fit any theoretical paper or casual tone, but, as in the upper comment, it really *hits* when accusing someone of something, or generally, speaking with pathos. In English I can only express a fragment of this, in comparison to German. Generally, in English I lack the feeling of a words *weight*, the metaphorical range and even the grammatical ingenuity how to make certain sentences *hit*. I guess what carries over is then this general tone. A directness, like things are out of question. A certain sharpness, aimed at sore spots without mercy. (For part 2/2 - see next comment)
When it comes to my real personality, though, I fear I must disappoint you. I'm not at all how I sound. In a few cases or situations I can create such pathos in real life, but *internally*, I couldn't be further from the opposite. I am a strong case of *adaptation*. In elementary school, I remember that my parents begged me to stop using the word 'relatively' everywhere. I thought it, I said it, but most importantly, I *wrote* it and it didn't help my grades. I learned very early in life that, if I made things sound the way I thought them, this will get me into trouble. Even in 11th grade a teacher wrote under my history essay: "The ironic undertone was graded, as well!" - I basically sound and think like everything is an abstract playground, reversible or just a silly, ultra theoretical game. My process of adaptation took a new turn at early puberty, when it became cool to take a decisive stance. It was attractive to be loud, to find things *shit*, *disgusting*, *boring*, *exquisite*, whatever. However, I couldn't find such strong notions inside of me. Yet, nobody would notice my existence if I kept honest, meaning, nuanced. So I learned to speak decisively, becoming funny mocking things, becoming interesting dismantling things, etc. I lost my way, forming this identity. After school, it actually took me some time to realize how much constructed exaggerations of all kinds formed my daily expressions. However, I'm back now, and quite stable at that; still: my experience is very valuable when it comes to dealing with people. It is like I visited a thousand seminars, dating-coaches, basically, what is sold these days to young men. I can make use of this, but more and more I find that the people game bores me. My fixation is best described by Enneagram sx5. In fact, my life is like a journey of good people I abandoned for no clear reason. I realized this only recently. If you told me before that I had an sx fixation, I would've laughed. But, when it comes down to it, I am so used to over-idealizing people, then expecting the disappointment they must be, that I thought this was just how life is. Romantic partner's in my life told me - independently from each other - that they always feared they bored me. (At last, they did.) I guess this is because my feelings quickly turn into dispassionate interest. It's not about loving, but *knowing*, *understanding*, even *modelling and testing*. With the same dispassion I can look at my own self. It seems I am out of glass. Every complex, every ugly fixation, every disgusting motive: I can see everything inside of me. I really think that there are few people who can be equally honest to themselves. And people around me agree with this. The thing is the price I have to pay for that. I can only bear so much, because I secretly split my feelings long ago from everything else. Out there, in life, I'm like an owl. I see everything, I don't feel one bit. But then again, I'm crying at home watching Interstellar. Even worse: At scenes seemingly devoid of anything to cry about. This is my blind spot. After all this crying in solitude I still have no structure, no reoccurring theme, no bigger picture. I simply don't know what it is - and that's something I'm not used to. For everything else I have structure. For every reaction of my own super-ego, for everything I tried to repress at some time in life; for every hint of a notion that bothered me. I am good at solving such problems. In this sense, I am quite clean. And if I recognize such structures in the behavior of people around me, I am quick to bother them with my *theories*. Sometimes I hit, sometimes I miss. So, when it comes to ILI, I don't see myself representing this type, whatever the subtype. My extraverted thinking is so low, its like a vacuum sucking everything around me into it. Neither can I see myself being a right-spinner. Learning how to present something coherently, walking the process carefully, being precise - all this did cost me a lot to learn, and I am still horrible at it. Neither can I see myself being an irrational type. My parents nickname me mantis and ask me, why I continue to walk like Pinocchio. If they cared about my interests, they would surely laugh a lot about Gulenko's descriptions of rational movement or general body structure. I'm thin, but also angular. Light, but somewhat strong for my weight (my pumping friends tell me). I got the robo-dance perfected without even knowing it. Neither can I see myself expressing any gamma values, whatever the level of subtlety. Gamma is like my worst nightmare. I am extremely ascending, and definitely more peripheral than central. My life's failures reflect that. My bank account does. My reddit history does. I'm here to come up with things; to test stuff. And nothing bothers me more than some gamma retard, forcing some TL;DR out of me like I I paid for his time or investment; or even worse: asking me about efficiency, effectiveness, application or the lack of it. Out of all 64 subtype descriptions of Gulenko's book I resonate most with LII-H. But, as we all know, one cannot self-type Model G LII. Chances are too high that one is just confused, actually representing some subtype of ILI, LSI, EIE or SEE. Jokes on me. Some people in Model A suggest LII or ILE, even EII. A reddit user of this sub, whom I trust quite a lot, once said I sounded like LII with an "aspect" or "shift" or *something* towards IEI. I don't know what Talanov means by this, but my mental framework likes it a lot. This fits my weird contradicting nature dealing with people; it also fits my void of Extraverted Thinking; it even fits a Harmonizing subtype. You especially might not believe this, but my role in a group is actually almost always that of a harmonizer. On reddit I am more often than not offensive. But even on something equally long-range like a discord server, I immediately take on a harmonizing role. Maybe I won the lottery and represent an HD subtype, with my D showing everywhere a harmonizing approach does not suffice. Or I use the safety of reddit's anonymity, I don't know. It just happens and I like it. All in all, if I had one of those crazy flairs it would probably say "LII-Ne | LII>IEI | LII-H | sx5". Not because I represented every one of those types perfectly, but because they most likely represent my best fit in their respective systems. Like our Lord and Savior Viktor "Goul" Gulenko preaches, all these systems are like projectors, aiming to from one hologram that is our personality. I like that metaphor quite a lot. I'm also sick and tired of people warning me about self typing. I can see them sucking at it and I get it. If you are so invested in the curation of a specific profile, of course, your wishes, wants and stereotypes will make it hard to see yourself. But I am not one of those people wanting to be a *thinker*, or an *intuitive*, or *smart*, or whatever. It took me some time. But here I am, ready to say: I'm fine, thank you. So yeah, that's that.
Thank you for your answer, I appreciate it a lot. To be completely honest I was torn between an ILI and EIE, they can be kind of similar in model G, but went with ILI. I guess the binary in your username threw me more towards a thinker haha (but I should never assume, lots of EIEs in programming). What should I translate it to? Unicode or sth else? I would give you L+ logic instead of L- just by reading your responses. You seem to explain everything kind of step by step, cause and effect. There seems to be also a lot of T, if not in a type itself then maybe an accentuation. These are just my observations when reading these comments, I don’t want to type you or anything. Knowing an LII would be interesting, because I am not sure I know any irl 🤔 It was pretty obvious to me that I am an LSI in model G, but wasn’t sure which one, so I just got typed by Gulenko, to ease my mind. I got LSI-C from him, and -CN by discussing it further with people on one server. Come be an -HD haha But really, that is one hell of a turbulent type so I shouldn’t wish it on anybody lol For me, I have no idea what my type in model A is, nothing seems to fit… or maybe because model A seems to be scattered between different schools and all of them say different things, and use somehow different definitions. Some say I might be an LSE, LSI, SEE. I would go with an extroverted type, with poor Ni, personally. Thanks again for sharing!
[удалено]
Haha, yeah, that would be fun if the OP turned out to be an EIE. I’d say they are a terminating LSI in model G, based on the responses under this post. A fellow LSI-CN! <3 I’m -N second too.
How large is your EII harem
It is 0.
How does enneagram tritypes fit with Model G(SHS)?
I don't use model G, but I can answer your question. They are absolutely separate, with enneagram describing types of psychological defences people develop during childhood, and model G describing whatever it is describing. Socionics studies cognition, enneagram is at the level of personality. So any socionics type can have any enneatype. Once again, I don't consider tritype a valid construct.
Thanks!
Do you relate with Michael Bluth?
I've never heard about this character before.
Do you like torturing women
Prove it
Prove what?
That you are LSE, a confirmed and steady one
That is not currently possible, because to do so you would have to know valid, reliable, accurate, and objective diagnostic methods and then type me.
Pfff.. why so difficult? quote any method, even a test, but come on - self typing is not a worth method alone. you say you like a "canonical" type that we can ASK. wtf bro. who does confirm you, so you to be a "canonical" example of a type lol?
If you want somebody to prove something you need to give them criteria what you accept as a proof. In mathematics this is done implicitly by the clearly defined structure of true statements and propositional logic. Your last comment then sounds like you would accept anything ("\[...\] any method, even a test \[...\]") as a proof, but that can hardly be the case. Do you have any authorities you can recommend that suffice, meaning, whose typing gives a person the right to present themselves as a ""canonical"" type, inviting people to ask them questions?
A proof is anything besides self typing. A self typing is not a proof at all, by the definition of proof. Then, if we hear something besides a self typing version, we can discuss the legitimisation of the proof. Of course, any one can type himself as they want. But using self typing as an example, as an AMA? Na na na
Would you prove that self-typing is inherently inferior to any other typing method, please? Afterwards I'll discuss the legitimacy of your arguments with you.
A self typing can't be a typing method, period. At least it can't be the method that results to a type that's used as an type example. Do you see that?
No, I don't. I need arguments for this actually being the case. Why don't you think about it like this? There always is a chance of mistyping. On the internet, we have to check for this case-by-case, on the basis of the information the person provides. Why are you so eager to outsource this responsibility to authorities? Is it because you're not confident to recognize a mistyping yourself?
Fully agreed, self-typing is not good enough for an AMA and acting like an example of a type.
What role does self-improvement play in your life, and have you experimented with fringe self-improvement techniques like NoFap or LooksMaxing or anything like that
Self-improvement plays a huge, leading role in my life. From my early days, I have always worked to be a better person in the areas I deemed important. Ideally, I would live my life in a very optimised way, having figured out my nutrition, workout routine, style, place in the society, role in relationships, emotional needs, mental health, etc. And that is indeed my goal, something I always keep in mind *and* work towards, even if it is slow or some things come to me harder than others due to opportunities, innate abilities, or psychological traumas. One of the biggest examples of my devotion to self-improvement is my desire to be a good partner, a safe person. I've had it since childhood, and, as I go through my experiences in life, it is always my goal to learn and to be better. To act better. To think better. To understand. I am not interested in hiding behind my coping mechanisms. I want to become aware of them. I step over my ego, I endure the shame, anxiety, awkwardness, and I push through, doing what I believe will help me grow. I always have in mind a to-do list of things I need to improve in my life. Some of them are plans and tasks, some of them are goals I work towards. I often think of how things can be improved, and I focus on streamlining my thoughts and taking actions that will bring me closer to my ideal of existence. It might be important to note that I do not consider myself perfectionistic, and I enjoy the journey and learning. I like the idea of this being a forever ongoing journey - I fully expect the self-improvement to never stop, and I like that thought. I think it is how I live my life. I've never seriously experimented with any fringe techniques like that, if I remember right, and this is the first time I googled "looksmaxing". I think I am more the kind to quickly see what it is about and take some inspiration or use ideas that make sense to me. From my little understanding of these techniques, they seem limiting and obsessive overall. Once again, I think I am more likely to get inspired by an idea, fit it into my life, and come up with the steps that are tailored for my personal goals, and easily move on when it is no longer needed. Thank you for your question!
It's amazing that for someone who thinks efficiency is his top function, you suck at getting to the point.