I like to test out things too. I consider many possibilities and then I deduct from them. It is frustrating to me when I see truth everywhere therefore I'm unable to arrive at that one or more structures/conclusions that make sense. Even learning about MBTI and wasting time concluding wrong ideas is annoying to me. And the thing that I would hate most about anyone is if they don't consider things from different angles that are already visible/invisible (facts) and call them facts/truth. Is this Ne-Ti thing? Even I am mostly skeptical of my abstract conclusions unless I have evidence. I mean I don't decide fast. I also tend to get stuck when considering too many things. I'm also afraid that no one will realize the reasons behind my actions, the way I reacted so I've been going out of my way to explain them. My feelings are usually not considered by the people around me and I get gaslighted a lot. I’m also afraid I'll never reach my potential. I worry of missing things out and not getting what the deserved things I need to reach my potential. Also, do LII people consider Fi things such as a person's life circumstances, and situation when deciding whether they want to stay with them or not? This also brings me to question whether there is anything as development in socionics. All I see is type descriptions and how the cognitive functions work for them on Google. What about their development? Can't an LII have good use of Fi,Fe, and ESI have good use of Ti,Te? If so, how good will they be compared to an Fi/Fe dom and Ti/Te dom? In CSJ system, he now has Octagram that says some people like for example, an LII may have good use of their Fi and Se if they grew up in an environment that disabled their Si and Fe function. Is there anything as such in socionics? From what it seems, a Ti dom will never reach the same depth of Fi as an Fi dom does. Honestly, typing gets confusing this way even more when you seem to fit into both types.
I used to think I was an ENTP because I had a lot of ideas, like for instance an idea about a simulation/game in which AI deities influence, but not control the normal, "lesser" AI. The Lesser AI may also influence the deities in certain ways, either directly, or indirectly through their influence on the world. There's more to this but I'm too stoned and inhibited by antipsychotics. I have had more metaphysical theories but I'm slowly losing my ability to access them. It's probably more Ni vulnerable than Ne. I forgot most of them though and my mind is lost in a fog. I recently found out about complex systems theory and realized this is what I wanted to study my whole life, but I didn't have a name for it. I'm starting to realize that since these systems deal with more tangible interactions that I might have SeTi rather than NeTi. Or perhaps even SeFi or FiSe. My brain used to be this rapid fire tangential machine but most of my ideas were about tangible things but I did have a big math thing when I was under the influence of stimulants. But then again math is pretty tangible. What you're describing is far more intellectual than I could ever be. I did score high in verbal IQ growing up, I had one of the highest scores they'd ever seen, but my working memory was terrible. Now I'm pretty sure both are terrible after what psychosis and antipsychotics have done to my brain. Damn those voices.
I think you could remake this video, i tought you lean to much on the ILE side of things when it comes to being very open, LII can be quite closed minded when they figured stuff out.
LIIs are interesting, sometimes it seems that they can never quite settle on anything enough to act upon it, but at the same time, they can be quite stubborn about structures and principles they have come to believe in, even against factual evidence. The point of the video though is to talk about Ne+Ti and how that can appear in the types, not to talk about LII specifically, which involves a lot more than just Ne+Ti, as they have Ni Demonstrative. What's more, there are a few things in the video that would apply more to LIIs than ILEs, such as not being so concerned about testing theories in an empirical way, or trying to do much with the theory practically speaking. I was talking about Ne+Ti absolutely without the influence of other elements that would be seen in a proper type.
This is a misconception brought about by both Dave Powers and Gage Brown. There's no such thing as a looper or jumper. Instead, what you get are types growing over time in their confidence and coming out of their low stakes/low reward Demonstrative/Critical Parent function into their high stakes/high reward Mobilising/Tertiary function. When this happens, a type like an ENTP will show a lot more Fe. They will be less matter-of-fact (less Te) and much more emotive and socially engaging (more Fe). However, what does NOT change is their strength and usage of Ti. It doesn't just disappear with the ascent of Fe. It' s already meant to be a subtle function that works with and flavours Ne.
@@WorldSocionics as an ENTP, I agree with your logic, reasoning, and conclusion. However, do you have your bases and trackable data to back up your "claims"? Clearly, Dave built a system (model) in which the data can be tracked with precision over and over again. Although, he (and she) admit that they are not sure whether their system is accurate. The model (theory) is Precise, but the Accuracy is not determined. Therefore, I am taking your words with a grain of salt because you lacked credibility when it comes to Scientific inquiry. Regardless, thank you for the "disenting" information.👌
@@freshbakedclips4659 One can either build a model, or derive conclusions from data. It's very hard to do both simultaneously. Socionics is model-based, it builds up a sense of what the fundamental categories must be through logical deduction from foundational principles, then it looks at what people fit these categories and then may collect further insight empirically on what they are like. Dave largely did the opposite, he observed data, without any kind of structure to guide and interpret those observations. What that means is that he found many observations, but he had nothing to know how to sort those observations, what the rules were for what can follow from what. That's why he has thousands of types, because there is no structure interlinking one set of coins to another, preventing certain nonsensical combinations from happening. He hasn't built the sandwich, he's just laid out the bread next to the lettuce and ham and cheese and a puddle of mustard. Any kind of variation is seen as a new type, rather than the same type in a different stage of their lives, because there is no narrative or trajectory, just a jumble of traits. That's also why you get glass lizards and other very strange things happening. That's data without the ability to interpret signal and by logically assessing how the data should be structured and fit together. The only place where there is some kind of positional structure, it's where he arbitrarily absorbs ideas from Tony Robbins, and using that to assume that all EP types are freedom oriented, all IJ types want orderliness, all EJ types are tribe focused, and all IP types are self-focused. This is immediately odd, because IJ, EJ, etc. are not meant to be so values-laden, they are containers for the functions. However, as that's the starting point, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and suddenly you have types that really need someone else to do Te for them actually being typed by Dave as Te doms. This is also why a purely data-driven approach, like the Big 5, has no narrative or way of telling what may go with what to make logical sense, just data trends.
@@WorldSocionics Even Gulenko admits there are 4 subtypes per type. The existence of subtypes has nothing to do with Dave whateverpowers, he is only taking into account 2/4 of them, anyway.
amazzzzing video. Your accent is very pleasant to listen. Please make the next video about Te+Ni
coming out day after tomorrow
Very enjoyable video, I can tell you are much more personally invested, the energy is more powerful.
I’m enjoying the exploration of what is authentic to the functions, with some practical application sprinkled in.
I like to test out things too. I consider many possibilities and then I deduct from them. It is frustrating to me when I see truth everywhere therefore I'm unable to arrive at that one or more structures/conclusions that make sense. Even learning about MBTI and wasting time concluding wrong ideas is annoying to me. And the thing that I would hate most about anyone is if they don't consider things from different angles that are already visible/invisible (facts) and call them facts/truth. Is this Ne-Ti thing?
Even I am mostly skeptical of my abstract conclusions unless I have evidence. I mean I don't decide fast. I also tend to get stuck when considering too many things. I'm also afraid that no one will realize the reasons behind my actions, the way I reacted so I've been going out of my way to explain them. My feelings are usually not considered by the people around me and I get gaslighted a lot. I’m also afraid I'll never reach my potential. I worry of missing things out and not getting what the deserved things I need to reach my potential.
Also, do LII people consider Fi things such as a person's life circumstances, and situation when deciding whether they want to stay with them or not?
This also brings me to question whether there is anything as development in socionics. All I see is type descriptions and how the cognitive functions work for them on Google. What about their development? Can't an LII have good use of Fi,Fe, and ESI have good use of Ti,Te? If so, how good will they be compared to an Fi/Fe dom and Ti/Te dom?
In CSJ system, he now has Octagram that says some people like for example, an LII may have good use of their Fi and Se if they grew up in an environment that disabled their Si and Fe function. Is there anything as such in socionics? From what it seems, a Ti dom will never reach the same depth of Fi as an Fi dom does. Honestly, typing gets confusing this way even more when you seem to fit into both types.
Hello, can you make videos about Se+Fe and Se+Te
sure, these would be more Themes than Blocking but I can talk about them, yes.
I used to think I was an ENTP because I had a lot of ideas, like for instance an idea about a simulation/game in which AI deities influence, but not control the normal, "lesser" AI. The Lesser AI may also influence the deities in certain ways, either directly, or indirectly through their influence on the world. There's more to this but I'm too stoned and inhibited by antipsychotics. I have had more metaphysical theories but I'm slowly losing my ability to access them. It's probably more Ni vulnerable than Ne. I forgot most of them though and my mind is lost in a fog.
I recently found out about complex systems theory and realized this is what I wanted to study my whole life, but I didn't have a name for it.
I'm starting to realize that since these systems deal with more tangible interactions that I might have SeTi rather than NeTi.
Or perhaps even SeFi or FiSe. My brain used to be this rapid fire tangential machine but most of my ideas were about tangible things but I did have a big math thing when I was under the influence of stimulants. But then again math is pretty tangible. What you're describing is far more intellectual than I could ever be.
I did score high in verbal IQ growing up, I had one of the highest scores they'd ever seen, but my working memory was terrible. Now I'm pretty sure both are terrible after what psychosis and antipsychotics have done to my brain. Damn those voices.
I think you could remake this video, i tought you lean to much on the ILE side of things when it comes to being very open, LII can be quite closed minded when they figured stuff out.
LIIs are interesting, sometimes it seems that they can never quite settle on anything enough to act upon it, but at the same time, they can be quite stubborn about structures and principles they have come to believe in, even against factual evidence.
The point of the video though is to talk about Ne+Ti and how that can appear in the types, not to talk about LII specifically, which involves a lot more than just Ne+Ti, as they have Ni Demonstrative. What's more, there are a few things in the video that would apply more to LIIs than ILEs, such as not being so concerned about testing theories in an empirical way, or trying to do much with the theory practically speaking. I was talking about Ne+Ti absolutely without the influence of other elements that would be seen in a proper type.
There are ENTP's who are Ne/Fe dominant, they are called loopers or jumpers.
The ENTP Ne/Ti dominant is the standard Myers-Briggs stereotype.
This is a misconception brought about by both Dave Powers and Gage Brown.
There's no such thing as a looper or jumper. Instead, what you get are types growing over time in their confidence and coming out of their low stakes/low reward Demonstrative/Critical Parent function into their high stakes/high reward Mobilising/Tertiary function.
When this happens, a type like an ENTP will show a lot more Fe. They will be less matter-of-fact (less Te) and much more emotive and socially engaging (more Fe). However, what does NOT change is their strength and usage of Ti. It doesn't just disappear with the ascent of Fe. It' s already meant to be a subtle function that works with and flavours Ne.
@@WorldSocionics as an ENTP, I agree with your logic, reasoning, and conclusion.
However, do you have your bases and trackable data to back up your "claims"?
Clearly, Dave built a system (model) in which the data can be tracked with precision over and over again.
Although, he (and she) admit that they are not sure whether their system is accurate.
The model (theory) is Precise, but the Accuracy is not determined.
Therefore, I am taking your words with a grain of salt because you lacked credibility when it comes to Scientific inquiry.
Regardless, thank you for the "disenting" information.👌
@@freshbakedclips4659 One can either build a model, or derive conclusions from data. It's very hard to do both simultaneously.
Socionics is model-based, it builds up a sense of what the fundamental categories must be through logical deduction from foundational principles, then it looks at what people fit these categories and then may collect further insight empirically on what they are like.
Dave largely did the opposite, he observed data, without any kind of structure to guide and interpret those observations. What that means is that he found many observations, but he had nothing to know how to sort those observations, what the rules were for what can follow from what.
That's why he has thousands of types, because there is no structure interlinking one set of coins to another, preventing certain nonsensical combinations from happening. He hasn't built the sandwich, he's just laid out the bread next to the lettuce and ham and cheese and a puddle of mustard. Any kind of variation is seen as a new type, rather than the same type in a different stage of their lives, because there is no narrative or trajectory, just a jumble of traits. That's also why you get glass lizards and other very strange things happening. That's data without the ability to interpret signal and by logically assessing how the data should be structured and fit together.
The only place where there is some kind of positional structure, it's where he arbitrarily absorbs ideas from Tony Robbins, and using that to assume that all EP types are freedom oriented, all IJ types want orderliness, all EJ types are tribe focused, and all IP types are self-focused. This is immediately odd, because IJ, EJ, etc. are not meant to be so values-laden, they are containers for the functions. However, as that's the starting point, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and suddenly you have types that really need someone else to do Te for them actually being typed by Dave as Te doms.
This is also why a purely data-driven approach, like the Big 5, has no narrative or way of telling what may go with what to make logical sense, just data trends.
@@WorldSocionics Even Gulenko admits there are 4 subtypes per type. The existence of subtypes has nothing to do with Dave whateverpowers, he is only taking into account 2/4 of them, anyway.
@@WorldSocionics
Do you disagree with the idea that the 2nd function needs to balance out the 3rd?
I mean Se+Te sorry