mikesilb...EII or a different type?

[mikesilb]

what i see as far more salient (and what, perhaps, i could communicate to you) are the differences in interpretation of quadra dynamics and our ways of seeing the IM elements

OK it looks like this is the name of the game. How you both interpret the quadras and IM elements (as key theoretical underpinnings for Socionics in general) will obviously dictate how you might see things one way while RSV might see things in a different way.

If it is OK with you, I would like to take you up on this offer to explain these interpretive differences (as you see them) so that I can make the most educated self-assessment possible. If you really are seeing all parts of my recent post except #15 and #16 (which I can see has more of a theoretical/definitional theme in general and cannot be interpreted in multiple ways, unlike the remaining 18 parts) as areas that could just as easily be interpreted as EIE as it does EII, then so much of this boils down to how you interpret this vs. how RSV interprets this.

So, if you could describe to me these quadra and IM element difference interpretations, maybe I could make a better assessment of where this all stands. Let me know if this works for you. Thanks in advance!

[aestrivex]

So, if you could describe to me these quadra and IM element difference interpretations, maybe I could make a better assessment of where this all stands. Let me know if this works for you. Thanks in advance!

i see your query. i will get to it.

[mikesilb]

So, if you could describe to me these quadra and IM element difference interpretations, maybe I could make a better assessment of where this all stands. Let me know if this works for you. Thanks in advance!

i see your query. i will get to it.

Thanks a million! I look forward to checking it out whenever you are ready.

[aestrivex]

this is not directly a response to differences in perceiving IM elements that RSV3 and i have, because i find it difficult to directly discuss that subject. rather, i will approach the question by simply talking some about RSV3's community "role." RSV3 as a member of the socionics community is one of the least eventful i can think of -- actually, from my point of view i would characterize him almost exactly as lamer. RSV3 is never dramatic or forceful about his typings, but very frequently, in my opinion, wrong and unable or unwilling to explain his points of view; his interactions are often quintessentially deadbeat and intellectually nonexistent. the most poignant such examples in which i really felt his responses were beyond lame have related his complete non-responses to my fairly detailed and substantive criticisms of the methodology of the test on this site (which he may simply ignore and attribute as the ramblings of a contrarian personality based on his typing of me -- i don't know). however, i believe that the nature of this particular disagreement is reasonably representative of the disagreements that RSV3 tend to have, both in his general apathy about my criticisms and in its content.

much of my criticism of this site is based, at least in broad principles, with the aggregated information it provides. this site relies heavily on jungian foundation and especially on test items that are little chunks of jungian dichotomies -- much like is seen in typical MBTI assessments and other very inexact trait scales. such items might be excellent for very general traits where conceptual precision is not needed nor desired, but in the context of socionics' integrated conceptual framework of perceptual methods of viewing the world, they seem to me substantially out of place. one measure to which i particularly object is his intertype test, which mostly evaluates relational goodness-of-fit on jungian and reinin dichotomies, which i believe is pathetically stupid. many of RSV3s typings, as well, seem to me to either follow this particular error and to underrepresent IM element dynamics and especially quadra dynamics. it is especially obvious to me based on RSV3's typings that he is particularly ignorant of quadra dynamics especially in a delta context, and he has a tendency to type people, especially relatively young women, that i feel are clearly not delta as IEE on the basis of ethical effusiveness and perhaps their presence at a socionics forum.


there are, to be sure, some modular differences between the way that i view socionics and the way that RSV3 seems to. i obviously see quadra dynamics as far more important than he ever might, and furthermore i see no use whatsoever in reinin dichotomies, whereas he continues to occasionally comment on them and use them in his test on this site. he has a number of additional hypotheses, such as the existence of secondary erotic styles, which i find equally pointless and misguided.


i cannot actually speak very much to RSV3's specific views of IM elements, i realize, because it seems to me that he has very few real ideas. occasionally it does seem to me that RSV3 understands obvious type or quadra-related themes (such as his typing of complicater-complexer as ILI from the standpoint of his indecisiveness; in this case, in my opinion, sheer nonsense, but a useful idea that i am at least able to recognize in his understanding), but that is not the norm; rather, it seems to me that in many typings (e.g. among the members of this site, kittykat, complicater-complexer, aleesha, banter, huitzilopochtli, stanprollyright, aphex, gracealone11, and yourself) seem based very little on actual observations or things relevant to IM-related themes, but rather on the kind of extremely general and not very type-useful explanation that he gave to you earlier. of the people i mentioned, i have varying knowledge and varyingly strong opinions about them, but all of them share the characteristic that the information they have presented about themselves, or else the information that RSV3 has decided to pick up on, seems to me to be wholly inadequate and wholly uninformative for quadra and values-related purposes.


you can read more about my understanding of IM elements here.

[mikesilb]

Hi Aestrivex,

I wouldn't mind taking a slight step back after your last post, since its main focus was how your style differed (for better or worse) from RSV3. I realized that this path did not really do much to answer my own specific type inquiry (about being an Fe-Ni Beta type vs. a Fi-Ne Delta type). Thus, I wouldn't mind stepping away from the "your method vs. RSV3's method" topic, and more into the theoretical underpinnings themselves (i.e. IM element and quadra discussion). While I am moving forward in my type determination process, I am still not completely there. I still have uncertainties that I think that you could really help me out with (Call it Ti-Dual seeking if you'd like).

My main uncertainty lies within the realm of the quadras. I am finding that people are generalizing way too much about each one of them (since they are at the intersection of two distinct ego blocks) to the point that I am getting majorly confused about them overall. Assuming that I am Fe-Ni (which does make sense if you take into consideration my friendliness, enthusiastic passion, and deep introspection/contemplation about concepts,ideas,meaning, etc.), I would like to identify with the way that most people are describing the Beta quadra. However, the way that it is being stereotyped, I almost feel that I have to be an extremely over-the-edge/extreme type of guy to fit within it. Contrastingly, I like the more open, lighthearted, and friendly aspects of alpha (and delta for that matter). But what makes me not fit within Alpha is that I tend to think that I am more contemplative and interested in theory than your typical ESE or SEI.

I would love to find a solid way to rule out the incorrect quadras so that the one left standing can be easily identified. If you could help me out with this part, I would BIG TIME appreciate this.

Just to let you know...after looking at your IM element page, I can see that Ni (and its concentrated focus on a given theory, idea, analysis-paralysis, etc) fits better than the quicker paced Ne-brainstorming, idea-generating style. Likewise, I am willing to accept for now that Fe may work better than Fi for reasons that we have already discussed (being passionate/enthusiastic rather than holding that passion and those feelings in reserve).

So I want to aim now on the quadras. Whenever I stare at the quadra material (irrespective of whether it came from a) wikisocion, b) socionics.us, or c) The 16types.info forum), I find myself more confused with all the stereotypes, and it is clouding my ability to determine which one makes the most sense for me. (One thing that both you and RSV3 have in common is that you both are very interested in using quadra values towards type determination). So I think that this is the next (and hopefully, final) direction that we need to take. Make sense from your perspective?

[aestrivex]

i cannot provide you with a "solid way to rule out the incorrect quadras," because i don't believe that any such rule exists. what i can do is describe some various perspectives on beta dynamics which to some extent resolve and shape the way that i approach thinking about this type of issue.

My main uncertainty lies within the realm of the quadras. I am finding that people are generalizing way too much about each one of them (since they are at the intersection of two distinct ego blocks) to the point that I am getting majorly confused about them overall. Assuming that I am Fe-Ni (which does make sense if you take into consideration my friendliness, enthusiastic passion, and deep introspection/contemplation about concepts,ideas,meaning, etc.), I would like to identify with the way that most people are describing the Beta quadra. However, the way that it is being stereotyped, I almost feel that I have to be an extremely over-the-edge/extreme type of guy to fit within it. Contrastingly, I like the more open, lighthearted, and friendly aspects of alpha (and delta for that matter).

one persistent issue with looking at it this way is the degree to which betas so often look outwardly different from the typically agressive/dramatic style with which these types of stereotypes are described. perhaps a more colloquial way of posing this question is: how is it reasonable that audrey hepburn and mike tyson in the same quadra, (assuming you agree with these typings that i find relatively uncontroversial, which you need not) and what kind of compatability could these two individuals possibly have?

i don't think it's fair to say that (even working with this simplistic differentiation) the "aggressive" kind of beta is merely an atypical outlier, or that the "placid" kind of beta is merely conditioned to behave as such by other circumstances. however, it is to me fairly obvious that among such collections of typings as those of rick, expat, dmitri lytov, (and my own), etc., etc., there are representatives of betas, and especially among beta NFs, that are most readily seen as "gentle," polite, and conventional, and then there are representatives among these typings that are highly overdramatic, daredevil-like, ostentatious, or whatever else. both of these kinds of typings, though, draw upon thematic associations of beta values -- as in your case, for instance, where despite you not presenting yourself as aggressive or overdramatic, your self-presentation struck me as obviously characterized beta values (and especially so in Fe/Ti values), for all the reasons that have been described and which you seem to intuitively understand.

among the socionics community, indeed, there are self-typed betas obviously pertaining to both of these pseudo-categories, and indeed some individuals that fairly nicely straddle this line (e.g., octopuslove, ezra, juju, etc.)


the nature of the social dynamics between different variations of betas tends to be complicated -- i could think of many exemplar cases of various social relationships on the often contentious community atmosphere (which is often beta-dominated, i think), both of relationships that were close and/or successful, and those that were predominantly antagonistic despite the fact that i typed most or all of the individuals involved as beta. i have sort of addressed that question in some other writings, and it was generally been a focus of my community involvement during the time in which my interest in the subject waned.

But what makes me not fit within Alpha is that I tend to think that I am more contemplative and interested in theory than your typical ESE or SEI.

right, i agree.

[RSV3]

Hey Mike, I just wanted to add a few points with respect to your quadra dilemma.

First, I'll reiterate my initial position regarding your type. That although you do display the emotional effervescence commonly associated with leading Fe types, you ultimately seem to embody delta values much more than beta values.

Second, it is truly unfortunate that most people new to socionics are generally (not always) both (a) highly inaccurate in their conclusions regarding others' types, and (b) overly confident in these concluions. Else by far, the easiest way for someone to determine which quadra he/she is in, when he/she is trying to decide between two opposite quadras, is to have that person spend substantial periods of time with people from both those quadras. It will become patently obvious to that person, in a relatively short period of time, which group of people they are at ease with and which group of people causes palatable tension; this is due to the extremely disparate nature of the two sets of values. Unfortunately, as mentioned above, there is a serious hurdle to this methodology--the fact that this person is unable to accurately type the people they are with in order to know which quadra they are in.

Third, keep learning the theory and reading the numerous socionics forums. Although there is a lot of misleading information out there, there is also a lot of helpful info. Good luck!

[aestrivex]

Second, it is truly unfortunate that most people new to socionics are generally (not always) both (a) highly inaccurate in their conclusions regarding others' types, and (b) overly confident in these concluions. Else by far, the easiest way for someone to determine which quadra he/she is in, when he/she is trying to decide between two opposite quadras, is to have that person spend substantial periods of time with people from both those quadras. It will become patently obvious to that person, in a relatively short period of time, which group of people they are at ease with and which group of people causes palatable tension; this is due to the extremely disparate nature of the two sets of values.

disagree thoroughly.

[mikesilb]

Hey everyone,

Aestrivex, I will respond very soon with my response to what you wrote (and especially the thread/post on your socionics.ws board). I find it really fascinating and want to discuss it very soon.

But first, RSV, I want to discuss a theoretical paradox that you very succinctly brought up which happens to be very telling...

First, I'll reiterate my initial position regarding your type. That although you do display the emotional effervescence commonly associated with leading Fe types, you ultimately seem to embody delta values much more than beta values.

While I would like to completely agree with you about this (by the way, I am agreeing more and more about the possibility that I am stronger at Fe than Fi...I really like when there is an interplay of genuine warmth, friendliness, and enthusiasm between people, rather than simply assuming that it is implicit at all times), what bothers me more than anything else is the fact that by definition, beta quadras have Fe as a value (as well as Ni) while delta naturally does not.

The more that I read about delta on a theoretical level...the more that I sense that it is about not necessarily making the passion and friendliness explicit. It is more of an implicit connection without any of its members needing or requiring much outward displays of friendliness or passion since it is much more low key overall.

On the flip side, beta appears to be a place where emotions are more overtly expressed. I tend to think that betas are also not necessarily "over the top"/extreme at all times but would rather have emotions expressed out in the open rather than to have friendships be "simply assumed" irrespective of any outward signs of warmth and/or enthusiasm.

To me, delta focuses more on remaining functional and low-key while beta (and also alpha for that matter) is more about sharing what each member feels passionate about.

If we look at those two with that single (emotion/feeling-based focus), clearly Beta can appear to seem right.

I am really trying to look at (and assess) each of the quadras based on the respective IM elements that constitute them. By definition, it sounds like this is the way that it is meant to work and hence, given that I appear to favor Fe over Fi (which before Aestrivex looked at my video, I probably would have gone the other way, but after understanding how Socionics defines Fe and Fi, I am now leaning towards Fe>Fi). Clearly, I watch the emotional atmosphere around me. If it is harmonious (towards me), I will be more likely to feel at ease. If it is not harmonious, I begin to question (and speculate) why this person has changed all of a sudden. I believe that Fi would be somewhat more likely to remain constant, irrespective of the emotional changes within others that occur. I think that Fe is less likely to do that, and will question and ponder the sudden changes in the emotional climate. I can totally see myself going down the Fe path here. I may deeply respect the Fi values of each individual, but perhaps even above that, I want a certain sense of OKness from the other person. Reassurance tremendously helps this matter (although it may not help me truly grow as an individual since I need to understand that I won't be liked all of the time).

On that note, I must say that I am a Social 6w7 (soc/sx stacking) on the Enneagram. I believe that my primary insecurity (other than whether I can accomplish a certain task) is whether I feel secure/OK amongst the people around me. If I sense (emotionally) that things do not look OK (in terms of interpersonal relationships), I will start analyzing every possible reason why this person acted with such-and-such behavior (and what I could have done to cause the behavior to suddenly change). I believe that this analysis paralysis is Fe and Ni at work. If my worries drop away and I find out that the other person meant well, I can ease up and return to a more upbeat and friendly style. Again, I think that Fe wins here.

I am starting to believe (in relative agreement with Aestrivex) that the qualities of beta (and the people who fit within beta) span a tremendously wide psychological territory (and are the Socionics version of the Enneagram 6s [with both their phobic and counterphobic styles]). I think, however, that the key focus of beta NFs (Beta STs may go a different way here...) is that there is an underlying Fe and Ni in place. I am slowly but surely getting convinced that this is correct in my particular case. Assuming that this is true, I think that more work needs to be done to describe universal tendencies of Beta (including both "phobic" and "counterphobic" versions) so that people can align more with their deeper sense of emotional openness, curious contemplation of thought-provoking topics, and enthusiasm/passion. Again, I tend to think that this style is different than delta's style, especially in its emotional quality.

So these are my initial thoughts thus far. In a nutshell, Fe>Fi, and I think that beta's "edgy" descriptions potentially need to be expanded.

Thanks RSV for your feedback here. Aestrivex, I will respond to your earlier post very soon...

[mikesilb]

one persistent issue with looking at it this way is the degree to which betas so often look outwardly different from the typically agressive/dramatic style with which these types of stereotypes are described. perhaps a more colloquial way of posing this question is: how is it reasonable that audrey hepburn and mike tyson in the same quadra, (assuming you agree with these typings that i find relatively uncontroversial, which you need not) and what kind of compatability could these two individuals possibly have?

... it is to me fairly obvious that among such collections of typings as those of rick, expat, dmitri lytov, (and my own), etc., etc., there are representatives of betas, and especially among beta NFs, that are most readily seen as "gentle," polite, and conventional, and then there are representatives among these typings that are highly overdramatic, daredevil-like, ostentatious, or whatever else. both of these kinds of typings, though, draw upon thematic associations of beta values -- as in your case, for instance, where despite you not presenting yourself as aggressive or overdramatic, your self-presentation struck me as obviously characterized beta values (and especially so in Fe/Ti values), for all the reasons that have been described and which you seem to intuitively understand.

the nature of the social dynamics between different variations of betas tends to be complicated -- i could think of many exemplar cases of various social relationships on the often contentious community atmosphere (which is often beta-dominated, i think), both of relationships that were close and/or successful, and those that were predominantly antagonistic despite the fact that i typed most or all of the individuals involved as beta. i have sort of addressed that question in some other writings, and it was generally been a focus of my community involvement during the time in which my interest in the subject waned.

Based on your experience of typing me (especially in the fact that there tends to be this general impression amongst the three of us [you, me, and RSV] that I am leaning more in the Fe direction), I am not at all surprised about the fact that there could be plenty of Betas that do not fit the 'extreme-edgy' style that is often stereotypical of Beta. I mean, each of the IM elements can seemingly apply themselves in a myriad of different ways that I can see Fe + Ni working in a way that is very conscious and sensitive to what others are feeling, while on the other hand, there could be other Fe + Ni types that are ready to provide massive shock value to everything that comes their way (and as I would certainly imagine that there can be everything in between as well).

I LOVE the concept that I brought up in my last post that models Betas in the same way that Enneagram Sixes (and sometimes Fours as well) are portrayed as "phobic" (shy/timid/reserved) and "counterphobic" ('in your face' extreme/edgy). I am not saying that the exact language of "phobic" and "counterphobic" describe the dichotomy perfectly...but they are to me the closest analogue that I can think of. I firmly believe that this is the setup that Betas appear to lie across. I even wonder whether there may even be a correlation between the beta quadra members and the Enneagram types that fit along the Riso/Hudson "Reactive Triad" of types 4,6, and 8? Who knows??

But no matter what, I think that there are two styles of Betas in exactly the way that you so beautifully described in your socionics.ws thread. The thing is that both styles (like the phobic and counterphobic 6s) have a linkage point that defines them as Beta (beyond their fundamental IM element setup). I believe that the combo of emotional/passionate awareness, contemplative imagination/theorizing/depth deeply unite at the very least the Beta NFs. (I am having a bit of a harder time connecting it to Beta ST with its action and mechanistic vantage point...but I tend to think that the relationship very much exists as well). I think that the bottom line is that Betas will likely want to live with all antennae ready to go. They want to live a dynamic life...lived to the fullest in terms of their passions, imaginations/fantasies, and willingness to deliver actionwise in order to bring that life to fruition. I can see that here could be a dividing point relative to Delta (where I can't see that dynamic stated above being as prevalent).

So as a synthesis between your previous thread and my typing experience of the last few weeks, these are my general impressions. I'm curious if this holds any water in terms of your experiences? Let me know.

One more question...Is there any way based on what you have seen of my videos and posts that I could be an IEI rather than an EIE? My gut feeling is no, since I feel like I am a dominant rational. I also have typically preferred the ethics/feeling IM element(s) over the intuitive one(s) in my own life. What do you think about this? I find it interesting that after showing my initial videos, you immediately said EIE (with an ESE backup) rather than having an IEI first impression. So I just wanted to follow up on that.

Additionally, how does that affect my potential subtype choice (assuming that you at all prescribe to this, now that we are honing in on EIE)? Any thoughts there would also be cool!

Thanks again!