Alabgry

[Ольга]

These  are general descriptions of 4 functions which I would like to use for  type -analyser.  Would you think they are good or not that good for the person who does not know socionics to evaluate yourself based on them? What choice would you make? I mean could you create a type profile of them: from strongest to the weakest?

 "How competent are you in logic?
In disputes and conflicts with people, you do not delve into their subjective feelings and motives, but seek an objective justification for everything. Links to rules and facts convince you. You can easily understand and explain the logic of various mechanisms and devices, the actions of people on the spot and without hesitation. You usually rely on your mind and ability to think in solving problems. At the same time, you may not always understand the reaction of people to your words and what they feel and think about you. You would prefer people to say this directly to you. It is difficult for you to understand people and their motives, to interpret emotions. It’s easier for you to solve problems in the field of theoretical and applied logic, such as technology, computers, statistics, construction industry, etc.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

2. How competent are you in ethics?
You delve into the feelings, motives, needs of people. You are able to harmonize and inspire the people around you. You are always with others, you like working with people, you value human rights and morality. You feel confident giving advice about relationships, explaining the feelings and motives of people, raising your spirits and finding words of compassion. If you quarreled with a person, you usually know what to do to make peace. You can say sorry even if it wasn’t your fault. You trust your heart.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

3. How competent are you in intuition?
Rely heavily on intuition to solve problems. You read between the lines and see the potential of people and objects. Know how to make reliable forecasts regarding the development of events. Able to use their imagination and come up with a story to convince others. Easily find a way out of a difficult situation. Able to quickly recognize a thief or scammer.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

4. How competent are you in sensorics?
You are a materialist who appreciates and collects wonderful quality things. You like to touch, hold, or even sniff objects to check for texture and quality. You rely heavily on your feelings. You know how to protect yourself and, if necessary, can adequately use physical force. Know how to work in conditions that may include harmful odors. Confidently act in stressful situations and do not give up. Appreciate the open and sincere people who speak on business. Do not read between the lines and do not like ambiguities. Ask specific questions, ask often for examples and more details to better understand what is happening. You give preference to traditional and proven methods.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

[Alabgry]

Hi, your favourite music is diverse in relation to TPE but you definitely have preference for Ego - music and some of your pictures could be related to Ego - you can understand what are they about. At the same time you have pictures of imagination too. What you do not like is logics and sensory in pictures (SLI - negative Si) and music. I would think that your subtype is ethical and most likely dynamic subtype EIE. It must be some extraverted TPE in a subtype.

EIE is my most likely subtype! that's interesting!
What do you mean by negative Si?

1) I remember I asked you to decide which one between the two type of energy and type groups you would associate yourself more or less and create the TPE profile from the strongest to the weakest: http://socionics4you.com/post-24?lang=en

I still think it's superid > superego > id > ego
I know it seems contradictory considering I have a preference for ego music but I can't see myself in this description of ego TPE

Ego-types are true born leaders. They are hard-working, possess great will power and intend to change the order of the surrounding environment at their sole discretion.

2) Some of the functions in your type analyser not differentiated - the same values or not exactly as they suppose to be. Ideally we look and discuss it in relation to the description which I am looking to improve right now. The description that your have mentioned from wiki would suit IEI and ILI equally well.

well I didn't want to give any element a wrong score based on my misunderstanding

Looking into your test results we have more points for introvert NF and dynamic but subtype could be EIE, two other subtype are less likely EII and IEE.

what made you think of Delta NFs when they're neither dynamic nor superid or ego types?

Within your type group of Superid types ILI most likely because your intuition is strong.
We already have discussed intuition on facebook and now in the process of discussing ethics. I would love to know your thoughts in relation to these descriptions and if this is easy or difficult to use as a criteria for understanding your type?
There is a lot of interesting thoughts around these functions in the group Socionics International Journal and you are welcome to take part in the discussion. https://www.facebook.com/groups/339434052825361/

1.  Fe How good are you at extroverted ethics?
You can easily convey the mood and express emotions adequately in every situation.  You know how to get from people the right emotional response; how to convince people by lifting up their mood and inspiring them for the right action. You feel a need to share your thoughts and emotions with others, to make them feel what you feel. You are a very emotional person, sensitive and tuned into emotions of other people. While you are a master of changing emotions of others to coerce, persuade, influence, transform, subdue, endear, or entice you feel that their emotions in turn can have a profound effect on how you feel.

1) I think my use of Fe is subtle and only with close people or those who I have a feeling I'd get along with.
2) I won't say I easily convey the mood & emotions adequately in EVERY situation as I can be awkward with people who I'm not close to and also I can waste time thinking if I should say x or not until it's too late and kinda regret it later
3) I don't always get it right but I do spend time to think about how to get the right emotional response from people, whenever I am replying to someone online I almost always consider how would they react to whatever I am writing (harder in real life conversations since you don't have enough time to think it through as I am not the "think on his feet" type)
4) I don't consider myself emotional (and maybe that's the biggest reason to not consider IEI for a long time) though I am considerate to other people feelings and try not to offend them
5) I wouldn't go as far as considering myself as a master of changing emotions

other thoughts: I do think I was more expressive as a kid (around 8 and younger) but I think that wasn't very appreciated rather I was expected to adapt traditional ways of how to be expressive like how to welcome guests (that's ok as long as you like the guests but I had no interest in faking) or how to talk to elders with respect (there's no problem here either except that disagreeing with elders is considered disrespectful)
but what I really hated was always being compared to other kids around my age "did you see how X acted? why can't you be like him" which I think made me avoid social gatherings as much as possible and being careful not to express my real thoughts and it wasn't that my thoughts were expressed in a rude way but more like "those are our traditions, why do you question them instead of taking them as they are?"

2. Fi How good are you at introverted ethics?
You care a lot about the relationships with others and read people’s feelings without saying. You easily spot the nature of the relationships between people and do not hesitate to offer help and advice on how to improve the situation. Your heart is naturally guide you in understanding problems between people and deciding whois right or wrong. You follow moral norms when solving arguments and do not want to jeopardize your conscience. You are a self-critical and sincere person who prefers to hide your feelings from others. You don’t want them to know how you feel. You are not kin to use emotions to convince others or to persuade them to help you.

1) not all relationships but there're few special ones yes, and yes I try to read people's feelings but it's only accurate if I really know the person
2) I do notice nature of relations & attraction as well but I am more of a passive observer of people and I don't offer help or advice and not sure if my advice would be helpful anyway
3) no I try to look at problems objectively and be fair with both parties but of course you'd get the feeling of who is right or wrong but you can't rely on that alone
4) I try to be fair when solving arguments, because otherwise my conscience will make me feel bad for days
5) so true
6) no, I do want them (close people) to know how I feel, it hurts when they misinterpret my feelings or don't care about them
7) yes I prefer if people help me because they like me and wants to help me not because I persuaded them to do it

Ne  How good are you at extroverted intuition?

You are a decisive person who is interested in opportunities to expand knowledge; curious, inventive and always full of ideas. You work on unique projects leaning towards things that are interesting, novel and exciting. You consider many possibilities at once and usually know what chance to take and the best choice to make. Relying on insight you find the way out of any difficult and seemingly hopeless situations. You avoid  restrictions that limit your freedom of choice and may be not keen giving promises to others as you wish to be open for the upcoming opportunities.
1. Good 2. Not good 3. Not sure.

1) not really decisive but I am curious
2) I prefer to work on projects that I have passion for, being "interesting, novel and exciting" is good bonus though
3) I guess but I need to be familiar with the subject to consider the right possibilities
4) doesn't always work out that well though
5) yes I don't like restrictions & really prefer to have freedom of choice

Ni How good are you at introverted intuition?

You are a doubtful person with a powerful imagination, vague premonition and a particular interest in changes occurring in time. You keep your memories safe and wonder how things may have unfold if you were able to change the past. This makes you question any decision made on a spot without giving it a substantial consideration. You do not like to rush with decisions but prefer to step back and wait for the right time to come or for the natural cause of events. You would not wish to make a wrong choice and regret it later. This cautious approach to life maybe considered as a passive and energy saving but suits the best to keep you safe in the conitnuosly changing world.
1. Good 2. Not good 3. Not sure.

100% YES

[Alabgry]

These  are general descriptions of 4 functions which I would like to use for  type -analyser.  Would you think they are good or not that good for the person who does not know socionics to evaluate yourself based on them? What choice would you make? I mean could you create a type profile of them: from strongest to the weakest?

I do think logics & ethics are too extremes so they may fit people who have one of them as the base function, as for the rest I think they're ok.
as for the order I'd like to hear what you think of the below first

"How competent are you in logic?
In disputes and conflicts with people, you do not delve into their subjective feelings and motives, but seek an objective justification for everything. Links to rules and facts convince you. You can easily understand and explain the logic of various mechanisms and devices, the actions of people on the spot and without hesitation. You usually rely on your mind and ability to think in solving problems. At the same time, you may not always understand the reaction of people to your words and what they feel and think about you. You would prefer people to say this directly to you. It is difficult for you to understand people and their motives, to interpret emotions. It’s easier for you to solve problems in the field of theoretical and applied logic, such as technology, computers, statistics, construction industry, etc.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

1) I don't consider it delving into their subjective feelings and motives, but I am aware that presentation matters as well as showing an understanding of the other person's situation because many times people hate it when you convince them with logic because it makes them feel stupid or as if they didn't think things through, so yeah I think this quote is very true "Convince a man against his will, He's of the same opinion still." so in short I seek objective justification but I try to balance that with people's need so even if option a is the best option logically if it will put someone at a really bad spot I'll prefer to go with option b because you may need that person's help later so it's better to stay on good terms
2) yes they convince me
3) yeah I do easily understand logical systems easily (as long as they're explained correctly) but the "on the spot" part is tricky because I don't like to be put on the spot, I remember one of my instructors put me on the spot "because I was charily spacing out" and asked me to do simple binary conversion which I normally do easily but when he suddenly pointed at me and asked me to do it my mind just froze
4) yes I do rely on my mind
5) as I said yesterday I do put some thought on how I want people to react to my words so I can expect their reactions and even if it's not what I expected it won't be way off
6) I can pick on signs of how people feel about me, but I can be doubtful especially when there are contradicting signs so yes I prefer it directly
7) I would like to say I don't have difficulty understanding people and their motives, but I have been deceived before and not only once (I think I have mentioned that I have been called "naive" or "too honest")
8 ) I specialized in computers so yes they're way more straight forward and easier than people and not to mention people at work relies on me to troubleshoot and solve system issues

2. How competent are you in ethics?
You delve into the feelings, motives, needs of people. You are able to harmonize and inspire the people around you. You are always with others, you like working with people, you value human rights and morality. You feel confident giving advice about relationships, explaining the feelings and motives of people, raising your spirits and finding words of compassion. If you quarreled with a person, you usually know what to do to make peace. You can say sorry even if it wasn’t your fault. You trust your heart.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

1) I think my answer to point 1 in logic applies here, but I'd like to add that I am not very inspirational
2) I like working with people who I like, but I am very introverted and love my time alone and spends a lot of time by myself so no I am not always with people (unless imaginary people counts)
3) I value fairness so if human rights are fair then yes but if they're not then no. Honestly I think "human rights" is a buzz word used for political reasons only
4) no I don't, I spends most of my time by myself so I don't consider myself a relationships expert to give advice, but I have no problem explaining someone else's perspective or motives, I have talked with friends who complained about a colleague or a supervisor and I will be like "I understand why that frustrates you but that guy is like this so what he actually meant is x but the expression failed him" as for giving words of compassion I find that hard or maybe awkward as I was raised with the concept that boys are logical & don't need emotions for example "boys don't cry only girls do"
5) yes I can make peace & apologize even if it isn't my fault as long as my pride wasn't disrespected (I can be so proud sometimes)

3. How competent are you in intuition?
Rely heavily on intuition to solve problems. You read between the lines and see the potential of people and objects. Know how to make reliable forecasts regarding the development of events. Able to use their imagination and come up with a story to convince others. Easily find a way out of a difficult situation. Able to quickly recognize a thief or scammer.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

1) yes a friend once noted that I spot the issues quickly will reading the logs, and I thought "well sometimes it's just a gut feeling other times I have seen something similar before"
2) yes for example I did predict that "Abdel Fattah el-Sisi" will be Eygpt president even before "Mohamed Morsi" was elected, because he built an extremely good reputation during Egyptian Revolution of 2011 that made him be seen as a hero.
3) yes I am very imaginative but I don't like lying so if I came up with a story I make sure I didn't lie (I do sometimes say half truths though)
4) it depends on what kind of difficult situation
5) I did say I have been deceived but it's because I didn't expect them to have bad motives, as for a thief I am not sure

4. How competent are you in sensorics?
You are a materialist who appreciates and collects wonderful quality things. You like to touch, hold, or even sniff objects to check for texture and quality. You rely heavily on your feelings. You know how to protect yourself and, if necessary, can adequately use physical force. Know how to work in conditions that may include harmful odors. Confidently act in stressful situations and do not give up. Appreciate the open and sincere people who speak on business. Do not read between the lines and do not like ambiguities. Ask specific questions, ask often for examples and more details to better understand what is happening. You give preference to traditional and proven methods.
1. Сompetent 2. Not competent 3. Not sure

1) no but I appreciates wonderful quality things (don't collects them though)
2) I guess I do that
3) rely heavily on my feelings for what? and how's it sensorics related?
4) no I sucks in self defense 
5) no I prefer comfortable work conditions
6) I am more cautious than confident
7) yeah I do appreciate them, but do you mean they're too formal? if so I prefer informal settings
8 ) I do read between the lines BUT I do not like ambiguities
9) I ask "why" a lot
10) if it's critical, I prefer proven methods otherwise I prefer new promising technologies

[Ольга]

EIE is my most likely subtype! that's interesting!
What do you mean by negative Si?

Negative Si appears in the preference of SLI and - dislikes of vulnerable sensory types. But it can appear in other types too because it loos disgusting. Interest in to body parts and decomposition of matter. This is extreme logical perception of human body but as an art - it is a different matter. Art is irrational and people use very strange images to express themselves. Like in music. Irrational because it is more about perception and energy. Mind can be switched off to allow the artist to explore their imagination.

1) I remember I asked you to decide which one between the two type of energy and type groups you would associate yourself more or less and create the TPE profile from the strongest to the weakest: http://socionics4you.com/post-24?lang=en

I still think it's superid > superego > id > ego

This is fine. Did I give you a link of TPE profiles description to choose? According to your test results dynamic subtype is possible but if you go with introverted - it is fine as well.

http://socionics4you.com/post-1674?lang=en

2) Some of the functions in your type analyser not differentiated - the same values or not exactly as they suppose to be. Ideally we look and discuss it in relation to the description which I am looking to improve right now. The description that your have mentioned from wiki would suit IEI and ILI equally well.

well I didn't want to give any element a wrong score based on my misunderstanding[/quote]

I only mentioned it because this description could lead you to think your type is ILI, not your fault.

Looking into your test results we have more points for introvert NF and dynamic but subtype could be EIE, two other subtype are less likely EII and IEE.

what made you think of Delta NFs when they're neither dynamic nor superid or ego types?

This is how subtype system works, it figures out the most similar subypes based on the strongest functions of a type within your type group ( for you it is Superid -types: ILI or SEI) and within the 3 other TPEs: EII, IEE, EIE. If you choose introverted TPE profile then subtype will be EII.
The TPE  model is a full TPE profile:  superid > superego > id > ego IEI - EII - IEE - EIE

[Ольга]

Within your type group of Superid types ILI most likely because your intuition is strong.
We already have discussed intuition on facebook and now in the process of discussing ethics. I would love to know your thoughts in relation to these descriptions and if this is easy or difficult to use as a criteria for understanding your type?
There is a lot of interesting thoughts around these functions in the group Socionics International Journal and you are welcome to take part in the discussion. https://www.facebook.com/groups/339434052825361/

1.  Fe How good are you at extroverted ethics?
You can easily convey the mood and express emotions adequately in every situation.  You know how to get from people the right emotional response; how to convince people by lifting up their mood and inspiring them for the right action. You feel a need to share your thoughts and emotions with others, to make them feel what you feel. You are a very emotional person, sensitive and tuned into emotions of other people. While you are a master of changing emotions of others to coerce, persuade, influence, transform, subdue, endear, or entice you feel that their emotions in turn can have a
profound effect on how you feel.

1) I think my use of Fe is subtle and only with close people or those who I have a feeling I'd get along with.
2) I won't say I easily convey the mood & emotions adequately in EVERY situation as I can be awkward with people who I'm not close to and also I can waste time thinking if I should say x or not until it's too late and kinda regret it later
3) I don't always get it right but I do spend time to think about how to get the right emotional response from people, whenever I am replying to someone online I almost always consider how would they react to whatever I am writing (harder in real life conversations since you don't have enough time to think it through as I am not the "think on his feet" type)
4) I don't consider myself emotional (and maybe that's the biggest reason to not consider IEI for a long time) though I am considerate to other people feelings and try not to offend them
5) I wouldn't go as far as considering myself as a master of changing emotions

other thoughts: I do think I was more expressive as a kid (around 8 and younger) but I think that wasn't very appreciated rather I was expected to adapt traditional ways of how to be expressive like how to welcome guests (that's ok as long as you like the guests but I had no interest in faking) or how to talk to elders with respect (there's no problem here either except that disagreeing with elders is considered disrespectful)
but what I really hated was always being compared to other kids around my age "did you see how X acted? why can't you be like him" which I think made me avoid social gatherings as much as possible and being careful not to express my real thoughts and it wasn't that my thoughts were expressed in a rude way but more like "those are our traditions, why do you question them instead of taking them as they are?"

2. Fi How good are you at introverted ethics?
You care a lot about the relationships with others and read people’s feelings without saying. You easily spot the nature of the relationships between people and do not hesitate to offer help and advice on how to improve the situation. Your heart is naturally guide you in understanding problems between people and deciding whois right or wrong. You follow moral norms when solving arguments and do not want to jeopardize your conscience. You are a self-critical and sincere person who prefers to hide your feelings from others. You don’t want them to know how you feel. You are not kin to use emotions to convince others or to persuade them to help you.

1) not all relationships but there're few special ones yes, and yes I try to read people's feelings but it's only accurate if I really know the person
2) I do notice nature of relations & attraction as well but I am more of a passive observer of people and I don't offer help or advice and not sure if my advice would be helpful anyway
3) no I try to look at problems objectively and be fair with both parties but of course you'd get the feeling of who is right or wrong but you can't rely on that alone
4) I try to be fair when solving arguments, because otherwise my conscience will make me feel bad for days
5) so true
6) no, I do want them (close people) to know how I feel, it hurts when they misinterpret my feelings or don't care about them
7) yes I prefer if people help me because they like me and wants to help me not because I persuaded them to do it


If those answers would be on the video - it would have much greater impact on our senses to actually feel what you are saying and how it is said. This is one of the reason why I prefer video to writing. Just sharing my thoughts, nothing against you or what you said.
I could but I would not ask more questions otherwise we sink into Ni- reflections which could be endless. And the point of this exercise is to know if you can choose between the two or not at all - based on description and how you think. if you cant at all, means the description is not helpful. However, the description work the best for the differentiating program function. In the other positions it is not as clear as in the program functions because of the influence of the other stronger function.

I am very happy that  you were able relatively easily to see the preference for Ni!

[Ольга]

As regards to 4 functions profile you are strong on intuition and we can place it in a first position easily. Sensory will be the last. Ethics will be the second. I think ethics is stronger than logics because you are naive and have been deceived and I assume trust again the same person or kid of hope for the better?
Also because you can explain easily motives of people, because you think how people could react or you at least think about ....You can apologise.
And if we have stronger Ni then your ethics is Fe. This is how the functions are paired in the model.  From your description of ethics I understand why you think you could be EII. And still the confidence about relationships seems not there as it should be. I do not know exactly how EII approach the sensitive help to others, but according to theory their preference is one of a judgement not based on emotions but more objective and cold.
We can assume that the aspects of ethics are balanced and this is why you are not sure which one your have Fi or Fe. Balanced ethics for IEI would be something like 55 - 45.
We did not discuss logics yet in more detail. We will soon. But the fact that you froze when asked to work on something logics related could be a sign of vulnerable logics.

[Ольга]

Hi, you have come to understand your type as IEI and you are happy with it? The most likely subtype would be EII because you are quite certain about your introversion.
 I still would like you to have a look at the description of the possible subtypes for IEI which is introverted or irrational or dynamics in the description:http://socionics4you.com/post-1674?lang=en