mikesilb wrote:
So let me get this straight. Your vote is still EIE (or as a backup, ESE) after both videos? Is that what my self presentation is pointing towards in your opinion?
aestrivex wrote:What would the proper methodology be in this case? How would you go about narrowing it down differently? I'm just curious about this so that we can move forward.
aestrivex wrote:mikesilb wrote:
So let me get this straight. Your vote is still EIE (or as a backup, ESE) after both videos? Is that what my self presentation is pointing towards in your opinion?
type assessment is hardly a vote, but yes, i do lean towards thinking you are EIE, and otherwise ESE or IEI. this is not for me the most confident of assessments, but nor is it a very unconfident one.
aestrivex wrote:mikesilb wrote:What would the proper methodology be in this case? How would you go about narrowing it down differently? I'm just curious about this so that we can move forward.
i opine that quadra values are far more important. in almost all cases that i actually see of people in this community, people who query whether they are one of two opposite-quadra types (ie, LSI or SLI, or SLE or SLI, or whatever) are usually beginners, and people who query whether they are one of two activity partners (ie, SLE or EIE) are usually on the right track. but not everyone agrees with my interpretations.
also, fwiw i find RSV3's typing unsurprising and find it likely that we will find no common ground in this typing.
RSV3 wrote:Interestingly enough, your normalized test result was ESE. The normalized test results are available to me only right now but I'm going to male them available hopefully by tonight. I will add a post defining what normalized means in this context.
mikesilb wrote:RSV3 wrote:Interestingly enough, your normalized test result was ESE. The normalized test results are available to me only right now but I'm going to male them available hopefully by tonight. I will add a post defining what normalized means in this context.
Hmmmm... That is intriguing, I guess. I have considerably more trouble viewing myself as an ESE (vs. either an EIE or an EII). I strongly feel that I belong in the NF Club, so I am curious what to make of this info. We will see... Thanks for pointing this out to me.
mikesilb wrote:OK...it sounds like quadras are HUGE in the Socionics way of viewing typological interactions (and type determination). I thought (coming from the Jungian/MB world) that the Information Elements were higher, but I am starting to notice that quadras are just as huge. So from my perspective, we need to attack this question fully.
mikesilb wrote:I will say that if I am an EII, I have to be an Ne subtype to make this work. There is no way that I am an EII-Fi subtype given the reaction to the video that I made. An Ne subtype is the only way that we could account for the self-presentation in the video.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest