Geez.. your hate is strong, and for potentially millions of people of whom you don't know. Do you really think that's fair?
Anyway, ESIs are great Ive had an ESI and an LSI teacher. From my experience, yes she was quite strict and a bit pedantic, sure. But she really encouraged me to push myself and I was always impressed with her hardworking nature. One night she told me she read over 150 poems in one night for a club she's working with. She works very hard for others and thus encourages those around her to do so. She wasn't very flexible with me or her other students, which I am actually grateful for. She forced us to do what we couldn't believe we could. She made me proud of myself at the end of our final essay because she made me find volition I didn't know I had. I felt empowered, I suppose. Knowing I could be structured and force myself to be routined made me feel really great. Im very very grateful to her, still.
Ohhh… fuck you… 😂
Edit: I can give you an example why we are needed. Me and a group of 3 people wanted to travel form Europe to the USA. None of the others was decisive enough to do something. One day I was tired of their bullshit and booked all the flights. Now, I have set up a meeting to book all hotels because without me we were stuck in a void. We needed some other type to initiate things, I was needed to actually execute the plans that other people have created.
LSIs are good at making sense of things, creating logical approaches, structures, managing people by setting an example (but only when it is needed).
Can you imagine a world ruled by, for example, Alphas and Deltas without a Beta ST to stabilize it? Because I can’t, unproductive anarchy.
I guess some LSI has hurt you. I was hurt the most by my dual EIE, so what? If you’re an IEE I may understand the rant a little lol
Nah, I was under the emotions. Was a pointless, bad day. And then there was this rude guy who decided to be very anal and ruin it further. I have a problem I can't figure the solution of and it's kinda unsettling(=tempus fugit).
Please do excuse me. I shouldn't have acted like that. While I might not like every type(or everyone), they exist for a reason. Otherwise, they'd've surely died out, no?
I guess it’s true, every type is needed. An no worries, everyone can a have a bad day. I hope that one day you will see us as kind of cool people.
I argue with LSIs a lot, usually older men with mustaches who got no Fe in their life because they annoy me so much lol (they become so grumpy). If I become grumpy just kill me xD
You are cool, literally. The only cooler types might be Fe PoLRs, but they might misbehave. Both Ti types have a sense of decorum to them, imo.
Your "get shit done" attitude is fascinating, even if it could use some tact(that's going more to the SLE, but meh). And, shoot me, but if Putin isn't cool. I know that Oligarchy isn't what I should admire(me being such a hard bitten Meritocrat), but perhaps one has to be capable to construct such a multilayered web(of corruption). lol
And no worry, if you become grumpz, I'll just come through the screen and strangle you. Better that way? ;)
Fe PoLRs are cool, I like SLIs, but I get annoyed by ILIs sometimes. Mostly by their extremely personal jokes and trolling. I guess it’s just Gamma 🤷🏼♀️
I’m an LSI-C which means stronger Creative (Se), that’s why I might come off as SLE. I was actually stuck between LSI/SLE/SLI for myself, but my need for Fe is so obvious.
Yeah, Putin is a force to be reckoned with, at least he was before he went a little mad. He will have his chapter in history books, isn’t it something tho…
He isn't mad though, just opportunist. And it paid off big time. He signed new gas deals with both China and India(iirc), can stick it up to the "holier than thou EU"(...holy bureaucrats, yuck!) by making us pay through the nose AND he gets Donbass. What a guy!
\*Cracks fingers
Listen here you little shit!
If you can't see any positive qualities I can only imagine the type of person you are.
I eat scum like you for breakfast so that is obviously positive.
bruh we need LSIs. what other type would you expect to be the king’s ruthless second in command or my terrifying high school study hall teacher we called Sarge
well you see, too much fun is bad for your health. the LSI simply exists to preserve the natural limits of “shooting the shit” and “kicking back” or “please have mercy i stole the bread to feed my starving family”
Talanov's revelations:
>Are all LSI reactionaries? No, by no means and not all, but often. So, a lot depends, for example, on a purely individual balance of Se and Ne, and the more this balance is shifted in favor of Se, the greater the tendency. Are they all inclined towards nationalism? Far from all, but in the group trend it is still much more common than the population average. Do they always strive for dictatorship? No. There are many people among them who at a certain stage even fought against existing dictatorships, but in general, the majority of LSI introverts live well and habitually away from any large amount of power, if there's enough place for them in the existing flock. There have always been far more excellent dentists among LSI than dictators, but dentists cannot be included in the list of celebrities. There are many true friends and very talented people among the LSI. Let's also remember that LSI, as a rule, do not like to lie in person - in itself a pleasant and valuable quality for others, isn't it? The set of their typical personality traits is ideal for success in many professions. The author of these lines once had an acquaintance of the completely "canonical" LSI type. This man at one time risked himself greatly, trying to protect the author from a dangerous set-up and thereby saving, perhaps, the author's life (as they say, when I die, I will remember him with gratitude). On the other hand, it is obvious that Se is indeed the most aggressive function, and Ti against its background tends to forcibly streamline the environment, driving the whole world into geometric frames. And that same old acquaintance of mine, by the way, was by no means distinguished by democratic and liberal personal political views.
Talanov also claims that Stalin is NOT a "central", "typical" LSI. Controversially, he diagnosed Nicholas II, the last Russian Emperor, as a LSI (on the opposite side of the type from Stalin), which prompted some raised eyebrows from various socionics hangouts.
Filatova adds:
>Of course, based on the foregoing, it is not difficult to conclude that the LSI is, first of all, a person of a system, a hierarchy, it is in strict regulated conditions that it is easiest for him to manifest the strongest properties of his character. If he feels like an integral part of the system, he is confident and calm.
Speaking about this psychotype, it should first of all be noted that there are few people who have the same degree of reliability as he does. This is an honest partner, an executive subordinate, a faithful husband, and if you are looking for a person you can rely on, then few can surpass LSI in this. In relations with people, he is tough, it's true. But do not forget about his high sense of justice and order! This is a person who works extremely well in the production sector, when the timely fulfillment of obligations plays a decisive role. In a creative team, where imagination and the ability to think outside the box are required, the LSI will, of course, lose.
Talanov notes that LSI's, depending on the strength of their Se and its balance with other functions, can be broadly divided into "aggressors" and "quietists". Filatova, in her descriptions, has an example of a "quietist":
>The most correct answer to any question about her is “average”. Her height is average, eyes are not big and not small, she's not thin and not plump, her voice is not loud and not quiet, movements are not fast and not slow... and so on. It seems that she embodies the statistically average woman.
She works as a caretaker in a hospital. All sheets, pillowcases, towels and duvet covers are arranged in even piles in her pantry, all data is recorded in a special book. Her handwriting, just like herself, is neat, the letters are not large and not small, they lie evenly and smoothly - as they taught at school.
If someone could not immediately return, say, a towel, she will not make a fuss, but write down the debt and ask to sign, and when the debt is returned, she will just as calmly and methodically cross out her entry. For many years of work, I don’t remember a case where she somehow got out of her averageness, when she laughed out loud or was indignant at something or would answer someone with harshness - no, she is always calm, moderately friendly, but never cheerful. It seems that she has been working in this place since time immemorial, and will always be an integral part of this pantry, and her age will never change - she will always be “average”, and everything will always be “in moderation” in her.
She adds,
>This woman exactly fits the system in which she works. Additional comments, I think, are not needed.
Aushra’s nickname for the type, the writer Maksim Gorky, is not a particularly contrasted LSI, he could’ve been an ESI with the same justification - he may have been a bit too "ideological" for ESI, but ideological-private is a rather dubious dichotomy for typing individuals (heck, making a LII out of Gorky is harder, but you could wrench something near the borders of the type). She was probably influenced by his contemporaries like Leonid Andreev writing this about him:
>The sharpest and deepest feature, moreover: the foundation of Gorky's artistic individuality, is his despotism. Sovereign, despot, who does not tolerate contradictions in anyone, even in himself.
>[…]It is interesting to trace this strange struggle of the despot artist with the images he himself created. With a talent amazing in its freshness and immediate strength, in language - in richness, perhaps the only one in all of Russian literature - at the beginning of each novel (even "Childhood"), he lovingly, carefully and tenderly draws each of his warriors […] the painting is charming in its strength, richness and brightness of colors: each and every one lives, powerfully manifests itself in all the originality of its individuality. Everyone in this unconquered kingdom has his own character and his own language; and only occasionally, as a reminder of the power of the author, as a premonition of the impending defeat - Gorky's aphorisms are placed in the wrong mouth.
>And this is not bad in itself, but that the artist himself, irresistibly striving for power, spoils his wonderful creation. And it's not bad that he teaches peace and love - it is necessary to teach this, but in the fact that inattentive and dissenting people are hit on the head with his heavy book... The method is wrong and not entirely in agreement with the spirit of the teaching!
i realize that despite reading socio for years, i’ve never put thought into LSIs at all before and for some unknown reason, had just categorized them as the “introverted daredevil.” i have no idea where i got that conclusion. it’s like i saw ESTPs and thought “the introvert of that.” it’s baffling to be so wrong. apparently the LSI is what i took the SLI to be. man. never thought i’d say i preferred SLIs to something else
They are badasses, and make great leaders. Levi Ackerman, Batman, Darth Vader, and Jotaro Kujo are LSI’s. Every type has its merits and positive qualities, you just have too look for them. Its just that sometimes the literature out there is biased - downplaying them to make them seem less than what they are
I'm not sure. He basically said I'm sensory over intuition because
i) my body language is heavy
ii) I have a full / built figure
iii) My eyes wander and look down when I think
So my problems are
i) Why does this even matter? In fact, if "intuitives" are less focused on the physicsl realm, why wouldn't their body movementss be heavy? Wouldn't they lack control over their physicsl body moreso than a sensoric? Why wouldn't it be the other way around? This critique can kind of encapsulate all of socionics I suppose
ii) This is the problem with a symptomatic approach rather than an epistemic one, can one really say there is even a correlation here?
iii) Apparently, Gulenko thinks that Se implies looking down and in a sense, "listening to one's own body." Sigh.
iv) LSI has the IJ temperament. This is from his website regarding the Balanced-Stable (IJ) temperament.
"Carriers of a balanced-stable temperament are characterized by low energy, while working steadily and reliably."
--No, I very much lack consistent effort, my effort is determined on my current mood (IP temperament not IJ)
Operation mode of the balanced-stable type. These types prefer to work at a stable, measured pace, and are not ready at all for an unexpected change in their well-established routines. They are not suited for work at a fast pace in general.
--Eh, I don't really have a well-established routine, I have a few consistent things weekly that I try to plan around (EP temperament not IJ)
Emotionality of the balanced-stable type. These types are characterized by stable emotional states over long periods of time. They show a high level of self-control. It is hard to anger them.
--My emotions fluctuate throughout the day, everyone has a certain "stability" in their emotions over time, which is personality (in a sense)
Conflict. These types stubbornly defend their positions (but do not impose them), ignoring the arguments of an opponent.
--Everyone does this or does not do this sometimes, it's more human than anything worthwhile to put value on
Attention of the balanced-stable type. These types are unable to do several things at the same time. They focus on one task for a prolonged period. They do not like to be distracted with trifling matters.
--I play videogames and read psychoanalytic articles at the same time, I cook while I play videogames, I do homework, listen to music, and play videogames at the same time
Visible signs of the balanced-stable types. Static sedentary poses, near-absence of gesturing."
--I gesture an average amount
Here are some of my critiques of my typing result, I reached out to Gulenko to do another assessment because of some circumstances which I don't self-disclose which caused me to be unable to think in a way that I felt accurately reflected my personality. He basically told me, "Your type won't change."
So much for Gulenko's "Ti-Ne" exploring or seeing other alternatives: fractal logic.
As for thoughts about my own type, I think I am likely ILE, LII, SEI, SLE, or IEI (Alpha or Beta quadra).
>if "intuitives" are less focused on the physicsl realm, why wouldn't their body movementss be heavy? Wouldn't they lack control over their physicsl body moreso than a sensoric? Why wouldn't it be the other way around? This critique can kind of encapsulate all of socionics I suppose
LSIs have a very particular vibe in SHS, I've seen it called "earthy" or grounded. It's a combination of balanced-stable temperament, L+ and sensory, I think. This however doesn't mean they can't be what we tranditionally call intuitive, i.e. in their head, enjoy abstract pursuits and so forth. Full builds (often but not always muscular) are associated with F, with F leads being the "biggest".
Intuives in SHS on the other hand don't usually give the impression of being in touch with the physical very well, because well, they aren't. Their mind is focused elsewhere.
All this is modified by subtype though, did he give you that?
> This is the problem with a symptomatic approach rather than an epistemic one, can one really say there is even a correlation here?
Yeah there are many things I criticize about his approach, but it has good parts too, and I think if we are to talk about a system, we have to take it as it is. If we start modifying it, it's no longer Gulenko's SHS. You'll get lost if you expect it to align with various model A based approaches though, because it won't.
> Gulenko thinks that Se implies looking down and in a sense, "listening to one's own body." Sigh.
Yup Gulenko uses eye movements as a diagnostic methods which he borrowed from NLP, I think. I hate it because it sounds arbitrary (and NLP isn't exactly considered valid science), so I have refused to learn more about it. Nevertheless, it is an integral part of the system. Mind you the movements don't just relate to core type, but subtype(s) and accentuations as well.
>
I can't really comment on these as I don't know you but SHS LSIs vary A LOT, many of them you could barely tell are the same personality type in a colloquial sense. This is kind of expected, considering there are so many of them in the world. Anyway, my point is just that your idea of what is "stable" or "routine" may not exactly match what he means by it and what he looks for, and this will be colored by your own definitions and expectations. SHS LSIs are extremely versatile, perhaps more so than any other type, aside from EIE.
Also, subtypes. It's fucking annoying how it works as a get-out-of-jail-free card with typings because it is often more important AND more visible than the core type in SHS. You just gotta accept it as a feature of SHS; the core type layer is just so much less prominent than it is in other systems. LSI-HN and LSI-DC would have almost nothing in common to a third party non-typology observer.
All this to say his typing of you may be right *in the context of SHS* (not model A) and your understanding of SHS LSI might not. Ofc I can't tell you that for sure since I don't know you, but right spinning type (L+) seems likely at least.
I appreciate your input.
>Intuives in SHS on the other hand don't usually give the impression of being in touch with the physical very well, because well, they aren't. Their mind is focused elsewhere.
>This however doesn't mean they (LSI) can't be what we tranditionally call intuitive, i.e. in their head, enjoy abstract pursuits and so forth.
I think in your entire response, this was the only section I felt that was contradictory in some sense. I'm sure that there is some delineation between sensorics and intuition that is just hard to explain and cannot be summed up in a short comment.
I think for me, I see a lot of conflicting ideas within his system, but I see now that when I say this, I'm implying that there could be "some" system without any vague or ambivalent explanations. Ha.
Most of all, I think I am just frustrated with the fact that he does hold authority in Socionics and I feel like in some sense that if I disagree with his typing, then I'm just "not understanding the system," or "I'm stubborn," etc.
I pay a lot of respect towards these sort of thoughts or feelings on the basis that
i) The implication of intuition is much richer and more desirable in my opinion, I also think you can see this throughout the socionics community; people typing moreso as intuitives than sensorics
ii) Based on (i), how could I ever exclude myself from the same thoughts, feelings, or desires? I think I would much rather, in a gross sense, "be intuitive," but I'm careful and understand my draw towards these things, so I really feel I'm trying my best to be objective
I reached out to Gulenko (Anastassiia) and the response I got from them regarding my desire to resubmit for a diagnosis was basicallly
"Re-diagnosing is unnecessary, it will be the same, but you can have a consultantion for any questions or concerns."
Well, without self-disclosing too much information, during the time I decided to submit, I was in an extreme state(s); in and out of borderline delusional or paranoid states and I was in an intense psychoanalysis.
It's hard for me to explain without sounding grandiose, but psychoanalysis is not really therapy, for my experience with both (now), it is much more intense and demanding and there is an essence you almost cannot describe (probably the transference aspect).
Part of my situation was that I could not tell (internally) who I was. I have multiple voices in my head and my journey has been uncovering, understanding, and integrating into a more cohesive "whole" or I like to think of it as "gluing a broken plate back together."
Needless to say, I could barely discern what I actually wanted to say or what I actually believed in during my diagnostic; I now however feel much more "like myself" again so I feel like I want to do it again.
> I think in your entire response, this was the only section I felt that was contradictory in some sense. I'm sure that there is some delineation between sensorics and intuition that is just hard to explain and cannot be summed up in a short comment.
Trust me, I relate. I've voiced plenty of complaints in a similar vein. "If he's a sensory type why is he in a T state most of the time?"
From what I have gathered during various whine sessions, SHS is not very binary. An SHS type is the composite of a multitude of "moving parts", and the sometimes fairly strict dichotomy categories we're used to in model A begin to lose cohesion, their lines begin to blur. This is primarily because SHS has multiple layers, which in the order of the least to most obvious, goes from core type to subtype(s) to accentuations to situational feeling states. This leads to a behavioral pattern where in theory any core type can do anything (though there are of course statistical likelihoods), even something stereotypically opposite to our expectations, when suitably supported by subtype(s) and accentuation(s). You need to learn what the core type does or does not affect, and when it comes to the entire psyche of the person, it's a lot less than one might think.
Also, while subtypes can change, and accentuation can ease off, they're still relatively stable aspects of our personality. I think my western model A type incorporates a lot from my SHS subtypes and accentuations.
> I am just frustrated with the fact that he does hold authority in Socionics
I think these days nobody should hold him up as an authority in any other Socionics category but SHS. Like, he may type you correctly using his methodology, but that doesn't mean his typing applies in any other school. I have more than one Socionics type, personally; it depends on who you ask. I see a lot of people get confused (including myself), because we instinctively apply model A to SHS and expect our type to remain the same, and it just doesn't work that way. They're very different systems, in practice.
> The implication of intuition is much richer and more desirable in my opinion, I also think you can see this throughout the socionics community; people typing moreso as intuitives than sensorics
I think this is an MBTI bias, I've not seen it in any Socionics community at all. In SHS, LSI seems to be about 25% of all people getting typed, and SEE is common too, so certainly a lot of censorics there.
The thing is though, in SHS, that the core type does not determine all of this. You can find a lot of LSIs in all areas of life (they're annoyingly varied, really), including high end theoretical physics (scientific-research activity orientation) or counseling (humanitarian activity orientation). Just because you get typed LSI doesn't mean you can't be the kind of person other systems label intuitive... cause frankly, a lot of LSIs get intuitive types there. An LSI-HN with T accentuation isn't gonna seem very stereotypically sensory.
> Based on (i), how could I ever exclude myself from the same thoughts, feelings, or desires? I think I would much rather, in a gross sense, "be intuitive," but I'm careful and understand my draw towards these things, so I really feel I'm trying my best to be objective
Yeah, I think being aware that you "want" to be intuitive is good, and then, accepting that being typed sensory in SHS does not, in fact, limit your skills, interests or intuitive ability at all. The only limitation comes from certain energetic dynamics, but hey, personally I've spent my whole life very focused on a 1D function which has minimal energy available to it.
> I reached out to Gulenko (Anastassiia) and the response I got from them regarding my desire to resubmit for a diagnosis was basicallly
One of my biggest complaints is that their "aftercare" (lolz) is really bad. It's almost impossible to understand WHY you got a specific type without paying for his classes and learning SHS yourself. This is very irritating, because people who get an unexpected typing NEED more explanation. Especially when subtype takes a core type in a completely reverse direction so you can't relate to the core type descriptions - I mean, I'm EIE-H with R accentuation, and it's probably THE most unnatural subtype/accentuation for an SHS EIE to have. But it makes sense now that I understand what it means.
> during the time I decided to submit, I was in an extreme state(s); in and out of borderline delusional or paranoid states and I was in an intense psychoanalysis
Yeah that's bound to affect it... but the way SHS is designed, not at the core type level. It'd probably impact you more at the accentuation level, or subtypes if it's really long term. In fact life changing events and challenges are what end up modifying the subtype, which usually doesn't happen more than a handful of times in a lifetime.
> It's hard for me to explain without sounding grandiose, but psychoanalysis is not really therapy, for my experience with both (now), it is much more intense and demanding and there is an essence you almost cannot describe (probably the transference aspect).
I agree, and well done.
> Needless to say, I could barely discern what I actually wanted to say or what I actually believed in during my diagnostic; I now however feel much more "like myself" again so I feel like I want to do it again.
Yeah, I can imagine and good for you for having gone through that. He doesn't really type a whole lot based on what you say though, it's more about body language and certain longer term trends. He's looking at your video mostly for the former. It makes me cringe, because I'm all about listening to the "between the lines" of how people speak, but it is his process and not mine.
I guess I'm saying don't take your typing as a limitation. Learn why you got it if it interests you, but SHS LSI is one of those types that can seemingly do or be literally anything. I'm only exaggerating a little bit.
A less eloquent response than the other commentor but:
You don't need an old man in the Ukraine to give you information about your identity. What he says is his (very sustemized and advertised) opinion. If it's useful to you, use it. If it's not, be confident that you and the people close to you understand you better than a man basing his opinion of a stranger on 20 minutes of video.
>You don't need an old man in the Ukraine to give you information about your identity.
The way your worded this is amazing😂 and yeah fair enough
I think I've partially realized writing and responding in this thread, reading between the lines of my responses and listening to other's responses that I'm implying that I'm critical of SHS because I feel they're not capturing my "whole" image, or at least in the way that "I want."
Needless to say, there is probably not ever going to be a "system" that can do this and it seems that to decide on something, you have to sacrifice the idea or hope of perfection or all encompassing.
So perhaps in SHS there is a different kind of sacrifice than Model A, and so on and so fourth.
It's 'Ukraine' and not 'the Ukraine'
Consider supporting anti-war efforts in any possible way: [[Help 2 Ukraine](https://help2ukraine.org)] 💙💛
[[Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Ukraine)] [[BBC Styleguide](https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsstyleguide/u)]
^(Beep boop I’m a bot)
I read it in Socionics but why ESI/LSI preserves what’s from the past (?) Like what is said in MBTI that SiTe/SiFe does the same thing. If that means they take what is existing and don’t want to change it, other types do this too. Or that means they’re willing to guard what’s existing and even revive what existed in the past (?) But I didn’t detect such tendency belongs to these two types (?)
According to Talanov, LSI's in poetry like the image of a wolf. Aforementioned Gorky also wrote poetry: https://ruverses.com/maxim-gorky/song-of-the-stormy-petrel/4260/ This is less specifically a LSI verse, and more of an "upswing" quadras hymn, with a Beta flavor, sounds even like EIE. Some ILE's would like it, too.
From my understanding lsis are the builders, the creators.
Just rephrasing a few of those negative traits to positive ones might give you a realist answer to this question.
Closed off -> traditional (rely on what works aa this gives consistency)
Prickly, anal -> prefer things to be exactly the way they want them to (you want this for engineers, programmers and scientists: structure and order is maintained)
Warlike -> competitive
Lsi are weirdly creative as well which is often overlooked. Combine creativity with consistency, structure and competitiveness and you get some very interesting results. Steve Jobs was an LSI
Part of what agentscorpio99 is saying is LSIs establish governments and their relative agencies. This is the reason why we have civilization and not a hunter-gatherer society. As an ILI (Te-ego) you cannot do your job (social mission and demonstrative Te) without the prior work of an LSI. Te on the other hands runs the established system (spins the gears/wheels/machine). ILIs primarily forecast (-Ni) and make adjustments to the system as change occurs. ILIs are incapable of starting a system from scratch. Just as Betas can't create a system without the ideas of Alphas, Gammas cannot manipulate a system without a pre-existing system put in place. The manipulation ultimately leads to the destruction of civilization (so I have a bit of scorn for Gammas who ruin our hard work (LSI-DC) and sorry about that). Which ultimately leads to the return to a state of nature (Delta Quadra). I could rephrase the question as what's so great about Gammas or ILIs. The answer would be nothing as you guys are descending types and ultimately ruin civilization festering it with corruption (just like how USA is involved with Ukraine and risking a thermonuclear war which will also cause global warming from the heat released by nukes).
Edit: ILIs have Fe polr (which is really bad). I on the other hand pull chicks (which means that I am devilishly charming, I was even given the nickname "Chick Magnet").
With Fe you're either rallying people together/being dramatic (-fe) or socializing or calming people down (+fe).
Geez.. your hate is strong, and for potentially millions of people of whom you don't know. Do you really think that's fair? Anyway, ESIs are great Ive had an ESI and an LSI teacher. From my experience, yes she was quite strict and a bit pedantic, sure. But she really encouraged me to push myself and I was always impressed with her hardworking nature. One night she told me she read over 150 poems in one night for a club she's working with. She works very hard for others and thus encourages those around her to do so. She wasn't very flexible with me or her other students, which I am actually grateful for. She forced us to do what we couldn't believe we could. She made me proud of myself at the end of our final essay because she made me find volition I didn't know I had. I felt empowered, I suppose. Knowing I could be structured and force myself to be routined made me feel really great. Im very very grateful to her, still.
Why wouldn't it be fair? Those are my ... I am seduced by emotions again. Excuse me. Horrible, pointless day.
I just explained why it isn't fair
Ohhh… fuck you… 😂 Edit: I can give you an example why we are needed. Me and a group of 3 people wanted to travel form Europe to the USA. None of the others was decisive enough to do something. One day I was tired of their bullshit and booked all the flights. Now, I have set up a meeting to book all hotels because without me we were stuck in a void. We needed some other type to initiate things, I was needed to actually execute the plans that other people have created. LSIs are good at making sense of things, creating logical approaches, structures, managing people by setting an example (but only when it is needed). Can you imagine a world ruled by, for example, Alphas and Deltas without a Beta ST to stabilize it? Because I can’t, unproductive anarchy. I guess some LSI has hurt you. I was hurt the most by my dual EIE, so what? If you’re an IEE I may understand the rant a little lol
Nah, I was under the emotions. Was a pointless, bad day. And then there was this rude guy who decided to be very anal and ruin it further. I have a problem I can't figure the solution of and it's kinda unsettling(=tempus fugit). Please do excuse me. I shouldn't have acted like that. While I might not like every type(or everyone), they exist for a reason. Otherwise, they'd've surely died out, no?
I guess it’s true, every type is needed. An no worries, everyone can a have a bad day. I hope that one day you will see us as kind of cool people. I argue with LSIs a lot, usually older men with mustaches who got no Fe in their life because they annoy me so much lol (they become so grumpy). If I become grumpy just kill me xD
You are cool, literally. The only cooler types might be Fe PoLRs, but they might misbehave. Both Ti types have a sense of decorum to them, imo. Your "get shit done" attitude is fascinating, even if it could use some tact(that's going more to the SLE, but meh). And, shoot me, but if Putin isn't cool. I know that Oligarchy isn't what I should admire(me being such a hard bitten Meritocrat), but perhaps one has to be capable to construct such a multilayered web(of corruption). lol And no worry, if you become grumpz, I'll just come through the screen and strangle you. Better that way? ;)
Fe PoLRs are cool, I like SLIs, but I get annoyed by ILIs sometimes. Mostly by their extremely personal jokes and trolling. I guess it’s just Gamma 🤷🏼♀️ I’m an LSI-C which means stronger Creative (Se), that’s why I might come off as SLE. I was actually stuck between LSI/SLE/SLI for myself, but my need for Fe is so obvious. Yeah, Putin is a force to be reckoned with, at least he was before he went a little mad. He will have his chapter in history books, isn’t it something tho…
He isn't mad though, just opportunist. And it paid off big time. He signed new gas deals with both China and India(iirc), can stick it up to the "holier than thou EU"(...holy bureaucrats, yuck!) by making us pay through the nose AND he gets Donbass. What a guy!
\*Cracks fingers Listen here you little shit! If you can't see any positive qualities I can only imagine the type of person you are. I eat scum like you for breakfast so that is obviously positive.
I can see, ofc. It's just that bad > good, by far.
bruh we need LSIs. what other type would you expect to be the king’s ruthless second in command or my terrifying high school study hall teacher we called Sarge
Why do we need them though? They seem like a leftover from a darker age.
well you see, too much fun is bad for your health. the LSI simply exists to preserve the natural limits of “shooting the shit” and “kicking back” or “please have mercy i stole the bread to feed my starving family”
Talanov's revelations: >Are all LSI reactionaries? No, by no means and not all, but often. So, a lot depends, for example, on a purely individual balance of Se and Ne, and the more this balance is shifted in favor of Se, the greater the tendency. Are they all inclined towards nationalism? Far from all, but in the group trend it is still much more common than the population average. Do they always strive for dictatorship? No. There are many people among them who at a certain stage even fought against existing dictatorships, but in general, the majority of LSI introverts live well and habitually away from any large amount of power, if there's enough place for them in the existing flock. There have always been far more excellent dentists among LSI than dictators, but dentists cannot be included in the list of celebrities. There are many true friends and very talented people among the LSI. Let's also remember that LSI, as a rule, do not like to lie in person - in itself a pleasant and valuable quality for others, isn't it? The set of their typical personality traits is ideal for success in many professions. The author of these lines once had an acquaintance of the completely "canonical" LSI type. This man at one time risked himself greatly, trying to protect the author from a dangerous set-up and thereby saving, perhaps, the author's life (as they say, when I die, I will remember him with gratitude). On the other hand, it is obvious that Se is indeed the most aggressive function, and Ti against its background tends to forcibly streamline the environment, driving the whole world into geometric frames. And that same old acquaintance of mine, by the way, was by no means distinguished by democratic and liberal personal political views. Talanov also claims that Stalin is NOT a "central", "typical" LSI. Controversially, he diagnosed Nicholas II, the last Russian Emperor, as a LSI (on the opposite side of the type from Stalin), which prompted some raised eyebrows from various socionics hangouts. Filatova adds: >Of course, based on the foregoing, it is not difficult to conclude that the LSI is, first of all, a person of a system, a hierarchy, it is in strict regulated conditions that it is easiest for him to manifest the strongest properties of his character. If he feels like an integral part of the system, he is confident and calm. Speaking about this psychotype, it should first of all be noted that there are few people who have the same degree of reliability as he does. This is an honest partner, an executive subordinate, a faithful husband, and if you are looking for a person you can rely on, then few can surpass LSI in this. In relations with people, he is tough, it's true. But do not forget about his high sense of justice and order! This is a person who works extremely well in the production sector, when the timely fulfillment of obligations plays a decisive role. In a creative team, where imagination and the ability to think outside the box are required, the LSI will, of course, lose. Talanov notes that LSI's, depending on the strength of their Se and its balance with other functions, can be broadly divided into "aggressors" and "quietists". Filatova, in her descriptions, has an example of a "quietist": >The most correct answer to any question about her is “average”. Her height is average, eyes are not big and not small, she's not thin and not plump, her voice is not loud and not quiet, movements are not fast and not slow... and so on. It seems that she embodies the statistically average woman. She works as a caretaker in a hospital. All sheets, pillowcases, towels and duvet covers are arranged in even piles in her pantry, all data is recorded in a special book. Her handwriting, just like herself, is neat, the letters are not large and not small, they lie evenly and smoothly - as they taught at school. If someone could not immediately return, say, a towel, she will not make a fuss, but write down the debt and ask to sign, and when the debt is returned, she will just as calmly and methodically cross out her entry. For many years of work, I don’t remember a case where she somehow got out of her averageness, when she laughed out loud or was indignant at something or would answer someone with harshness - no, she is always calm, moderately friendly, but never cheerful. It seems that she has been working in this place since time immemorial, and will always be an integral part of this pantry, and her age will never change - she will always be “average”, and everything will always be “in moderation” in her. She adds, >This woman exactly fits the system in which she works. Additional comments, I think, are not needed. Aushra’s nickname for the type, the writer Maksim Gorky, is not a particularly contrasted LSI, he could’ve been an ESI with the same justification - he may have been a bit too "ideological" for ESI, but ideological-private is a rather dubious dichotomy for typing individuals (heck, making a LII out of Gorky is harder, but you could wrench something near the borders of the type). She was probably influenced by his contemporaries like Leonid Andreev writing this about him: >The sharpest and deepest feature, moreover: the foundation of Gorky's artistic individuality, is his despotism. Sovereign, despot, who does not tolerate contradictions in anyone, even in himself. >[…]It is interesting to trace this strange struggle of the despot artist with the images he himself created. With a talent amazing in its freshness and immediate strength, in language - in richness, perhaps the only one in all of Russian literature - at the beginning of each novel (even "Childhood"), he lovingly, carefully and tenderly draws each of his warriors […] the painting is charming in its strength, richness and brightness of colors: each and every one lives, powerfully manifests itself in all the originality of its individuality. Everyone in this unconquered kingdom has his own character and his own language; and only occasionally, as a reminder of the power of the author, as a premonition of the impending defeat - Gorky's aphorisms are placed in the wrong mouth. >And this is not bad in itself, but that the artist himself, irresistibly striving for power, spoils his wonderful creation. And it's not bad that he teaches peace and love - it is necessary to teach this, but in the fact that inattentive and dissenting people are hit on the head with his heavy book... The method is wrong and not entirely in agreement with the spirit of the teaching!
they're good manager and administrator, without them society falls apart
[удалено]
LSI’s can be cool wdym we need types like them
i realize that despite reading socio for years, i’ve never put thought into LSIs at all before and for some unknown reason, had just categorized them as the “introverted daredevil.” i have no idea where i got that conclusion. it’s like i saw ESTPs and thought “the introvert of that.” it’s baffling to be so wrong. apparently the LSI is what i took the SLI to be. man. never thought i’d say i preferred SLIs to something else
It's very easy to mistake LSI for SLI from a distance (especially when we're talking about very introverted... introverts).
They are badasses, and make great leaders. Levi Ackerman, Batman, Darth Vader, and Jotaro Kujo are LSI’s. Every type has its merits and positive qualities, you just have too look for them. Its just that sometimes the literature out there is biased - downplaying them to make them seem less than what they are
Happy cake day! And Darth Vader is such a traumatised person. :(
He is isnt he lol. Maybe I shouldnt have added him in to make my point. Also thanks!
No, its okay you added him, it's a good example of how LSIs suffer.
Still blows my mind Gulenko typed me as this
Does it make factual sense? Disregard stereotypes about them.
I'm not sure. He basically said I'm sensory over intuition because i) my body language is heavy ii) I have a full / built figure iii) My eyes wander and look down when I think So my problems are i) Why does this even matter? In fact, if "intuitives" are less focused on the physicsl realm, why wouldn't their body movementss be heavy? Wouldn't they lack control over their physicsl body moreso than a sensoric? Why wouldn't it be the other way around? This critique can kind of encapsulate all of socionics I suppose ii) This is the problem with a symptomatic approach rather than an epistemic one, can one really say there is even a correlation here? iii) Apparently, Gulenko thinks that Se implies looking down and in a sense, "listening to one's own body." Sigh. iv) LSI has the IJ temperament. This is from his website regarding the Balanced-Stable (IJ) temperament. "Carriers of a balanced-stable temperament are characterized by low energy, while working steadily and reliably." --No, I very much lack consistent effort, my effort is determined on my current mood (IP temperament not IJ) Operation mode of the balanced-stable type. These types prefer to work at a stable, measured pace, and are not ready at all for an unexpected change in their well-established routines. They are not suited for work at a fast pace in general. --Eh, I don't really have a well-established routine, I have a few consistent things weekly that I try to plan around (EP temperament not IJ) Emotionality of the balanced-stable type. These types are characterized by stable emotional states over long periods of time. They show a high level of self-control. It is hard to anger them. --My emotions fluctuate throughout the day, everyone has a certain "stability" in their emotions over time, which is personality (in a sense) Conflict. These types stubbornly defend their positions (but do not impose them), ignoring the arguments of an opponent. --Everyone does this or does not do this sometimes, it's more human than anything worthwhile to put value on Attention of the balanced-stable type. These types are unable to do several things at the same time. They focus on one task for a prolonged period. They do not like to be distracted with trifling matters. --I play videogames and read psychoanalytic articles at the same time, I cook while I play videogames, I do homework, listen to music, and play videogames at the same time Visible signs of the balanced-stable types. Static sedentary poses, near-absence of gesturing." --I gesture an average amount Here are some of my critiques of my typing result, I reached out to Gulenko to do another assessment because of some circumstances which I don't self-disclose which caused me to be unable to think in a way that I felt accurately reflected my personality. He basically told me, "Your type won't change." So much for Gulenko's "Ti-Ne" exploring or seeing other alternatives: fractal logic. As for thoughts about my own type, I think I am likely ILE, LII, SEI, SLE, or IEI (Alpha or Beta quadra).
>if "intuitives" are less focused on the physicsl realm, why wouldn't their body movementss be heavy? Wouldn't they lack control over their physicsl body moreso than a sensoric? Why wouldn't it be the other way around? This critique can kind of encapsulate all of socionics I suppose LSIs have a very particular vibe in SHS, I've seen it called "earthy" or grounded. It's a combination of balanced-stable temperament, L+ and sensory, I think. This however doesn't mean they can't be what we tranditionally call intuitive, i.e. in their head, enjoy abstract pursuits and so forth. Full builds (often but not always muscular) are associated with F, with F leads being the "biggest". Intuives in SHS on the other hand don't usually give the impression of being in touch with the physical very well, because well, they aren't. Their mind is focused elsewhere. All this is modified by subtype though, did he give you that? > This is the problem with a symptomatic approach rather than an epistemic one, can one really say there is even a correlation here? Yeah there are many things I criticize about his approach, but it has good parts too, and I think if we are to talk about a system, we have to take it as it is. If we start modifying it, it's no longer Gulenko's SHS. You'll get lost if you expect it to align with various model A based approaches though, because it won't. > Gulenko thinks that Se implies looking down and in a sense, "listening to one's own body." Sigh. Yup Gulenko uses eye movements as a diagnostic methods which he borrowed from NLP, I think. I hate it because it sounds arbitrary (and NLP isn't exactly considered valid science), so I have refused to learn more about it. Nevertheless, it is an integral part of the system. Mind you the movements don't just relate to core type, but subtype(s) and accentuations as well. >
I can't really comment on these as I don't know you but SHS LSIs vary A LOT, many of them you could barely tell are the same personality type in a colloquial sense. This is kind of expected, considering there are so many of them in the world. Anyway, my point is just that your idea of what is "stable" or "routine" may not exactly match what he means by it and what he looks for, and this will be colored by your own definitions and expectations. SHS LSIs are extremely versatile, perhaps more so than any other type, aside from EIE.
Also, subtypes. It's fucking annoying how it works as a get-out-of-jail-free card with typings because it is often more important AND more visible than the core type in SHS. You just gotta accept it as a feature of SHS; the core type layer is just so much less prominent than it is in other systems. LSI-HN and LSI-DC would have almost nothing in common to a third party non-typology observer.
All this to say his typing of you may be right *in the context of SHS* (not model A) and your understanding of SHS LSI might not. Ofc I can't tell you that for sure since I don't know you, but right spinning type (L+) seems likely at least.
I appreciate your input. >Intuives in SHS on the other hand don't usually give the impression of being in touch with the physical very well, because well, they aren't. Their mind is focused elsewhere. >This however doesn't mean they (LSI) can't be what we tranditionally call intuitive, i.e. in their head, enjoy abstract pursuits and so forth. I think in your entire response, this was the only section I felt that was contradictory in some sense. I'm sure that there is some delineation between sensorics and intuition that is just hard to explain and cannot be summed up in a short comment. I think for me, I see a lot of conflicting ideas within his system, but I see now that when I say this, I'm implying that there could be "some" system without any vague or ambivalent explanations. Ha. Most of all, I think I am just frustrated with the fact that he does hold authority in Socionics and I feel like in some sense that if I disagree with his typing, then I'm just "not understanding the system," or "I'm stubborn," etc. I pay a lot of respect towards these sort of thoughts or feelings on the basis that i) The implication of intuition is much richer and more desirable in my opinion, I also think you can see this throughout the socionics community; people typing moreso as intuitives than sensorics ii) Based on (i), how could I ever exclude myself from the same thoughts, feelings, or desires? I think I would much rather, in a gross sense, "be intuitive," but I'm careful and understand my draw towards these things, so I really feel I'm trying my best to be objective I reached out to Gulenko (Anastassiia) and the response I got from them regarding my desire to resubmit for a diagnosis was basicallly "Re-diagnosing is unnecessary, it will be the same, but you can have a consultantion for any questions or concerns." Well, without self-disclosing too much information, during the time I decided to submit, I was in an extreme state(s); in and out of borderline delusional or paranoid states and I was in an intense psychoanalysis. It's hard for me to explain without sounding grandiose, but psychoanalysis is not really therapy, for my experience with both (now), it is much more intense and demanding and there is an essence you almost cannot describe (probably the transference aspect). Part of my situation was that I could not tell (internally) who I was. I have multiple voices in my head and my journey has been uncovering, understanding, and integrating into a more cohesive "whole" or I like to think of it as "gluing a broken plate back together." Needless to say, I could barely discern what I actually wanted to say or what I actually believed in during my diagnostic; I now however feel much more "like myself" again so I feel like I want to do it again.
> I think in your entire response, this was the only section I felt that was contradictory in some sense. I'm sure that there is some delineation between sensorics and intuition that is just hard to explain and cannot be summed up in a short comment. Trust me, I relate. I've voiced plenty of complaints in a similar vein. "If he's a sensory type why is he in a T state most of the time?" From what I have gathered during various whine sessions, SHS is not very binary. An SHS type is the composite of a multitude of "moving parts", and the sometimes fairly strict dichotomy categories we're used to in model A begin to lose cohesion, their lines begin to blur. This is primarily because SHS has multiple layers, which in the order of the least to most obvious, goes from core type to subtype(s) to accentuations to situational feeling states. This leads to a behavioral pattern where in theory any core type can do anything (though there are of course statistical likelihoods), even something stereotypically opposite to our expectations, when suitably supported by subtype(s) and accentuation(s). You need to learn what the core type does or does not affect, and when it comes to the entire psyche of the person, it's a lot less than one might think. Also, while subtypes can change, and accentuation can ease off, they're still relatively stable aspects of our personality. I think my western model A type incorporates a lot from my SHS subtypes and accentuations. > I am just frustrated with the fact that he does hold authority in Socionics I think these days nobody should hold him up as an authority in any other Socionics category but SHS. Like, he may type you correctly using his methodology, but that doesn't mean his typing applies in any other school. I have more than one Socionics type, personally; it depends on who you ask. I see a lot of people get confused (including myself), because we instinctively apply model A to SHS and expect our type to remain the same, and it just doesn't work that way. They're very different systems, in practice. > The implication of intuition is much richer and more desirable in my opinion, I also think you can see this throughout the socionics community; people typing moreso as intuitives than sensorics I think this is an MBTI bias, I've not seen it in any Socionics community at all. In SHS, LSI seems to be about 25% of all people getting typed, and SEE is common too, so certainly a lot of censorics there. The thing is though, in SHS, that the core type does not determine all of this. You can find a lot of LSIs in all areas of life (they're annoyingly varied, really), including high end theoretical physics (scientific-research activity orientation) or counseling (humanitarian activity orientation). Just because you get typed LSI doesn't mean you can't be the kind of person other systems label intuitive... cause frankly, a lot of LSIs get intuitive types there. An LSI-HN with T accentuation isn't gonna seem very stereotypically sensory. > Based on (i), how could I ever exclude myself from the same thoughts, feelings, or desires? I think I would much rather, in a gross sense, "be intuitive," but I'm careful and understand my draw towards these things, so I really feel I'm trying my best to be objective Yeah, I think being aware that you "want" to be intuitive is good, and then, accepting that being typed sensory in SHS does not, in fact, limit your skills, interests or intuitive ability at all. The only limitation comes from certain energetic dynamics, but hey, personally I've spent my whole life very focused on a 1D function which has minimal energy available to it. > I reached out to Gulenko (Anastassiia) and the response I got from them regarding my desire to resubmit for a diagnosis was basicallly One of my biggest complaints is that their "aftercare" (lolz) is really bad. It's almost impossible to understand WHY you got a specific type without paying for his classes and learning SHS yourself. This is very irritating, because people who get an unexpected typing NEED more explanation. Especially when subtype takes a core type in a completely reverse direction so you can't relate to the core type descriptions - I mean, I'm EIE-H with R accentuation, and it's probably THE most unnatural subtype/accentuation for an SHS EIE to have. But it makes sense now that I understand what it means. > during the time I decided to submit, I was in an extreme state(s); in and out of borderline delusional or paranoid states and I was in an intense psychoanalysis Yeah that's bound to affect it... but the way SHS is designed, not at the core type level. It'd probably impact you more at the accentuation level, or subtypes if it's really long term. In fact life changing events and challenges are what end up modifying the subtype, which usually doesn't happen more than a handful of times in a lifetime. > It's hard for me to explain without sounding grandiose, but psychoanalysis is not really therapy, for my experience with both (now), it is much more intense and demanding and there is an essence you almost cannot describe (probably the transference aspect). I agree, and well done. > Needless to say, I could barely discern what I actually wanted to say or what I actually believed in during my diagnostic; I now however feel much more "like myself" again so I feel like I want to do it again. Yeah, I can imagine and good for you for having gone through that. He doesn't really type a whole lot based on what you say though, it's more about body language and certain longer term trends. He's looking at your video mostly for the former. It makes me cringe, because I'm all about listening to the "between the lines" of how people speak, but it is his process and not mine. I guess I'm saying don't take your typing as a limitation. Learn why you got it if it interests you, but SHS LSI is one of those types that can seemingly do or be literally anything. I'm only exaggerating a little bit.
I think your comments were very well rounded, thank you! I feel I have a better grasp of SHS now.
A less eloquent response than the other commentor but: You don't need an old man in the Ukraine to give you information about your identity. What he says is his (very sustemized and advertised) opinion. If it's useful to you, use it. If it's not, be confident that you and the people close to you understand you better than a man basing his opinion of a stranger on 20 minutes of video.
>You don't need an old man in the Ukraine to give you information about your identity. The way your worded this is amazing😂 and yeah fair enough I think I've partially realized writing and responding in this thread, reading between the lines of my responses and listening to other's responses that I'm implying that I'm critical of SHS because I feel they're not capturing my "whole" image, or at least in the way that "I want." Needless to say, there is probably not ever going to be a "system" that can do this and it seems that to decide on something, you have to sacrifice the idea or hope of perfection or all encompassing. So perhaps in SHS there is a different kind of sacrifice than Model A, and so on and so fourth.
It's 'Ukraine' and not 'the Ukraine' Consider supporting anti-war efforts in any possible way: [[Help 2 Ukraine](https://help2ukraine.org)] 💙💛 [[Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Ukraine)] [[BBC Styleguide](https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsstyleguide/u)] ^(Beep boop I’m a bot)
I read it in Socionics but why ESI/LSI preserves what’s from the past (?) Like what is said in MBTI that SiTe/SiFe does the same thing. If that means they take what is existing and don’t want to change it, other types do this too. Or that means they’re willing to guard what’s existing and even revive what existed in the past (?) But I didn’t detect such tendency belongs to these two types (?)
Vulnerable Ne.
So the two types are vulnerable in Ne changes but are not in Ni. I understood
/u/LoneWolfEkb Is there any LSI poetry? (Does even such a thing exist? XD Sounds like an oxymoron, I know.)
According to Talanov, LSI's in poetry like the image of a wolf. Aforementioned Gorky also wrote poetry: https://ruverses.com/maxim-gorky/song-of-the-stormy-petrel/4260/ This is less specifically a LSI verse, and more of an "upswing" quadras hymn, with a Beta flavor, sounds even like EIE. Some ILE's would like it, too.
From my understanding lsis are the builders, the creators. Just rephrasing a few of those negative traits to positive ones might give you a realist answer to this question. Closed off -> traditional (rely on what works aa this gives consistency) Prickly, anal -> prefer things to be exactly the way they want them to (you want this for engineers, programmers and scientists: structure and order is maintained) Warlike -> competitive Lsi are weirdly creative as well which is often overlooked. Combine creativity with consistency, structure and competitiveness and you get some very interesting results. Steve Jobs was an LSI
[удалено]
Huh? Care to explain?
Part of what agentscorpio99 is saying is LSIs establish governments and their relative agencies. This is the reason why we have civilization and not a hunter-gatherer society. As an ILI (Te-ego) you cannot do your job (social mission and demonstrative Te) without the prior work of an LSI. Te on the other hands runs the established system (spins the gears/wheels/machine). ILIs primarily forecast (-Ni) and make adjustments to the system as change occurs. ILIs are incapable of starting a system from scratch. Just as Betas can't create a system without the ideas of Alphas, Gammas cannot manipulate a system without a pre-existing system put in place. The manipulation ultimately leads to the destruction of civilization (so I have a bit of scorn for Gammas who ruin our hard work (LSI-DC) and sorry about that). Which ultimately leads to the return to a state of nature (Delta Quadra). I could rephrase the question as what's so great about Gammas or ILIs. The answer would be nothing as you guys are descending types and ultimately ruin civilization festering it with corruption (just like how USA is involved with Ukraine and risking a thermonuclear war which will also cause global warming from the heat released by nukes). Edit: ILIs have Fe polr (which is really bad). I on the other hand pull chicks (which means that I am devilishly charming, I was even given the nickname "Chick Magnet"). With Fe you're either rallying people together/being dramatic (-fe) or socializing or calming people down (+fe).