That's the reason why LSI's r my duals. I hate ambiguity too and easily notice when I can't not trust someone or when they're lying to me. I really am not prone to wishful thinking and prefer to be assured of important things going well.
I was typed LSI by old man G and did not see it until my best friend told me that I'm inflexible/rigid, extremely stubburn, willful, uncompromising about how I think things are or must be. She also said I always overthink and plan to excess. I admit I tend towards the extreme as I don't like ambiguity and have the need for things to make sense. I was never neat or physically organized, even tho I try to be. Enneagram is 6w5 sx and certainty is something I absolutely need.
Many counterphobic 6 Contender Guardians* [SiTe = ISTJ] would be miscategorised as LSI. The CP6ness would be seen as 'Force' [the Se Assertive subfunction]. * = Keirsey Dichotomies: Contender = Directive Reserved, Guardian = Concrete Cooperator . There is an Essential Motivator Pattern too in Please Understand Me 2. But in short: Trust authority, yearn to belong, seek security, prize gratitude (esp the SFJs ie Informing Guardians: SiFe and FeSi).
I once had a colleague stuck on the ti+ni loop for years and was depress after a huge career setback. But when she went back to her usual ti+se, she became better than before. Valuable learning on different ways a person can grow.
I think your constant repeat on the j & p difference of mbti and socionics is too much repetition. It would be nice if you could just say socionic istj or write as ISTj which most ppl people who are already mbti entrenched will understand. I think u also have very little faith on mbti-prone people's intelligence, being first exposed to mbti doesn't mean we follow its interpretation to the dot. Learning is fluid and dynamic, many youtubers on mbti do demonstrate that and so does their audience.
I know im a Ti dom with a good amount of Se. I dont understand the whole system of different models and how they cut the mind into different pieces. One thing i know is that the persona / dominant / ego is a killer. All the problems of people being one dimensional comes from them letting the mask absorb their true faces. Now he is so in love with his own thinking he cant find practical ways to use em in daily life. He is so identified with being a bad boy that forgets its not a rule to always disagree with others. He is so in love with the idea of the right thing at the right time that hes art is instantly a flawd thing to him that doesnt have truth behind so it dont matter. Brother with an ego out of control is coocked. Kill your ego before it kills you.
I have a theoretical problem with your definition of the LSI's ego block of - If I'm not mistaken - using Se Force as a tool to enforce Ti set of rules, systems, laws. You end up having LSI as a type whose end point is the enforcing of logic on reality, which should logically be Te. You also end up with an introverted type whose end point is external: the state of external reality and its conformity to your inner intellectual formula. Again Te. Logically, Ti, as an introverted logical "ought" should mainly have as an aim inner order. Which can be described as understanding (assembling of propositions based on logical links) which has to be descriptive of the outter world and not prescriptive as you describe, because it can't be both prescriptive of the inner and outter world at the same time. Moreover, as an introverted function as a base, as an introverted type, LSI should have an introverted end point, since the base sets the end point/agenda. The way you describe it seems to be like the end point of LSI is extroverted (enforcing), which seems contradictory. In my view, LSI and LII main focus should be the ordering (Logic/thinking) of their inner world (introverted), it's its own reward. Achieving understanding. The creative, like you said, is a tool for that aim, but here specifically (tools come as many forms) the creative is about the object of this ordering. Se creative for LSI make it so it's about ordering physical concrete things in their inner world. Basically what you said in your Se+Ti video of ordering bricks, except it's not in the outter world like it sounds in this video, but bricks in your head, which seems weird unless you want to get a concussion, but examples can be martial arts, or mechanics. Martial arts is about ordering sequences of concrete space movements in your head based on your opponents movements, basically this: ruclips.net/video/6vMO3XmNXe4/видео.html which highlights very well how internal it is. But you have to use Se to practice and reach that Ti understanding of the art. Just like mechanics where it's about the assembly of real physic concrete parts, but you have to use Se tinkering, real world dissassembling to map the workings of each parts in your head. LII the same but the context is the abstract. So if what I said is true (based from your descriptions of the functions and also a lost of your block videos) then, you see how the Ti+Se diference seems odd as it seems to mix up extraversion and introversion, base and creative in a weird way, upside down like an extraverted Ti which is basically Te. My way of speaking is very "prescriptive", but the whole comment is really a question: am I wrong and if so, where? I'm no expert and a lot of my resources on socionics and typology come from this channel, so please see no disrespect, thank you.
Does the PoLR stats change for any of the types? For instance, a PoLR Extroverted intuition (Ne) start thinking out side of the box and think about the world of possibilities?
MBTI confuses the 4 D Si demonstrative of an ISTJ as their lead function and then adds thinking characteristics to their definitions of Si to make sense of it for the introverts.
I have a theory that socionics demo functions are MBTI lead functions and that is actually how one translates types. Demo functions are obvious to other people, but not that relevant to the user. So LSI is ISTJ, IEI is INFP and so on. t. LSI
5:30 sounds like Ti gone full Dominant Force. INTP (Myers code representation) myself has the same character through Ti. I find myself the more a convert to the ID bloc domain in settled situations.
@@Retrogamer71 But look at the predisposed role of the type: "Inspector". In SHS, LSI varies a lot: LSI-D is like the Initiator Guardian (TeSi = ESTJ), LSI-N is like the Contender Guardian (SiTe = ISTJ) and LSI-C is like the Contender Artisan (TiSe = ISTP) it even has Contender Artisan tropes in there such as mechanic and martial artist. I suggest you look at descriptions of LSI and SLI across many different schools of socionics to see how they vary. Then ask yourself: why do they vary?
Great as always Jack. However, I have a question. Given that you describe the LSI as being adamant about their structure, to the point of stubbornness, why did you type Wittgenstein as an LSI? Sure he was known for being intense, but he was also notable for being possibly the only philosopher who has gone back to "destroy" their own philosophy, and build a completely new one on top of that. Hence the popular distinction between the early and late Wittgenstein. I think this shows at least some valuing of Ne, given that he always showed constant obsessive thinking about problems, to the point where people described him as neurotic. What do you think?
"constant obsessive thinking about problems" => is a doubly introverted process, detached from reality (Ti-Ni/Si). Extroverted intuition is the intuition of potential. Potential of external objects. Or in other words, instantiated and contingent objects that you cannot access just by being by yourself (like a Boltzmann brain) interfacing with the fundamental. Ne: 1- An example of extroverted intuition is finding this video intriguing and seeking to learn more. 2- Another example of extroverted intuition is finding a gap in one's understanding, and then proceeding to seeking an answer elsewhere and in the instantiated (Ne), in contrast to filling the gap by yourself (Ni). Ni: 1- An example of introverted intuition is interfacing with the infinite realm of all possible ideas and grabbing one that you found interesting to explore; 2- Another example consists in collecting factual data (on systems or people), and then seeing through the most likely outcome in the future, or what most likely happened in the past. -------- Now in terms of Wittgenstein, neither Ne nor Se were present in what he was doing in his philosophy of mathematics. It was all very Ti, Ni and Si. 1- Ti thirst for structure and understanding, 2- Ti-Ni interest in the abstract, setting up of axioms and filling of the gaps. 3- Ti-Si building up of the conclusion based on the accumulation of simple, black and white or very well understood and established logical steps. ===> First Conclusion: LSI or LII, he definitely wasn't a normal and healthy expression of his type. he is doubly detaching from the object, making him a super cognitive introvert. His Si need for clarity and certainty is too strong for LII and Ni over-exploration of the abstract is too strong for LSI. The only way to determine the type would be to look at other areas (most of which we don't have access today): 1- Is he Si or Ni stubborn in the purest expressions of these information elements? 2- Quadra values. 3- How was his extroverted side expressed? Through Se or Ne? 4- Was his blind spot Ne or Se Second conclusion: LSI seems to make a bit more sense than LII after all. --------------------------------- TL'DR: There is a misconception in our understandings of Ne, provoked by what exists in the MBTI land.
Jack's typing of Wittgenstein is right. Wittgenstein mistakenly thought he solved all philosophies problems when writing the Tractatus, and there was nothing more to say until it turned out that in fact there was. It took two of the greatest thinkers in the 20th century to poke holes in his solution which essentially led to his return as a full-time philosopher once again. Norman Malcolm believed that a rude gesture gesticulated to Wittgenstein by Sraffa with a subsequent quip of what the logical form of that was opened the doorway for Wittgenstein revising, or revolutionising, his previous views. The earlier philosophy was so fixated on the logical analysis of propositions; it ignored the most basic and fundamental property of languages, communicating information in social settings. Communicating in social settings introduces ambiguity as an essential feature of communicating, making it impossible for a strict logical analysis of language impossible. Philosophy is a social and intellectual activity just read Plato's dialogues featuring Socrates. Aristotle's works are meant to be lecture notes, rather than stand alone full blown treatises which can be read irrespective of social activity. It's obvious that Wittgenstein has failed in his ambitions. How much did Wittgenstein fail in initially solving philosophies problems? How compatible are the Tractatus and PI? Some philosophers believe they are compatible with PI showing a more mature and nuanced perspective of analysing language, essentially making the Tractatus a young man's work broadly right but too bold for its own good. Whereas others think they are two distinct philosophies. Ultimately either approaches taken by Wittgenstein are compatible with an LSI typing. LSI's can be both deeply conservative and fierce radicals - even simultaneously. It quite conceivable for an LSI to modify their beliefs accounting for the new precisely so they can remain relevant - healthy dose of small-c conservatism. Likewise, they may detest a currently existing system, even one they created, and abolish it so they can create a better one. Once it became clear that his previous work didn't solve all the problems of philosophy, then either strategy would be open to an LSI.
@WorldSocionics Wittgenstein is the only philosopher who's biography made me cry because of how relatable he was. I also appreciated his radical shift of mind dedication to truth and clarity to the point of madness
watch ISTP explained correctly. It gets its ideas from Jung, Kepinski, Augustinaviciute and others, but the main thing is the logical deduction from fundamental axioms.
It can be, but it's not a given. Socionics and MBTI are two different systems that define functions and stack structure differently. I suggest studying the difference between the two before approaching socionics
So why does no one suggest LSI and IEI in a relationship , activity is a good romantic relationship it has all the nuances and my relationships with LSI is always Good it just never goes the distance beyond friendship (fuck buddies) but nevertheless is long lasting .
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
That's the reason why LSI's r my duals.
I hate ambiguity too and easily notice when I can't not trust someone or when they're lying to me.
I really am not prone to wishful thinking and prefer to be assured of important things going well.
👍
Thanks. Stimulating Theory.
U LSI?
Thank you!!
Great work as always 👍
I'm looking forward to your LSE-ESTj content.
I was typed LSI by old man G and did not see it until my best friend told me that I'm inflexible/rigid, extremely stubburn, willful, uncompromising about how I think things are or must be. She also said I always overthink and plan to excess. I admit I tend towards the extreme as I don't like ambiguity and have the need for things to make sense. I was never neat or physically organized, even tho I try to be. Enneagram is 6w5 sx and certainty is something I absolutely need.
Did you consider LII for yourself before?
@@rupiik No I did not.
This episode is poetry!❤
I saw the impostor instead of inspector
LOL.
Don't make jokes about my beautiful duals😂❤️
@@Moheroine Do you categorise your self as ENFP in MBTI?
Many counterphobic 6 Contender Guardians* [SiTe = ISTJ] would be miscategorised as LSI. The CP6ness would be seen as 'Force' [the Se Assertive subfunction].
* = Keirsey Dichotomies:
Contender = Directive Reserved,
Guardian = Concrete Cooperator . There is an Essential Motivator Pattern too in Please Understand Me 2. But in short: Trust authority, yearn to belong, seek security, prize gratitude (esp the SFJs ie Informing Guardians: SiFe and FeSi).
😂
I once had a colleague stuck on the ti+ni loop for years and was depress after a huge career setback. But when she went back to her usual ti+se, she became better than before. Valuable learning on different ways a person can grow.
I think your constant repeat on the j & p difference of mbti and socionics is too much repetition. It would be nice if you could just say socionic istj or write as ISTj which most ppl people who are already mbti entrenched will understand. I think u also have very little faith on mbti-prone people's intelligence, being first exposed to mbti doesn't mean we follow its interpretation to the dot. Learning is fluid and dynamic, many youtubers on mbti do demonstrate that and so does their audience.
Hope you don't mind the criticism, I'm enjoying your content at this point of time.
Loops don't exist in socionics
I know im a Ti dom with a good amount of Se. I dont understand the whole system of different models and how they cut the mind into different pieces. One thing i know is that the persona / dominant / ego is a killer. All the problems of people being one dimensional comes from them letting the mask absorb their true faces.
Now he is so in love with his own thinking he cant find practical ways to use em in daily life. He is so identified with being a bad boy that forgets its not a rule to always disagree with others. He is so in love with the idea of the right thing at the right time that hes art is instantly a flawd thing to him that doesnt have truth behind so it dont matter. Brother with an ego out of control is coocked. Kill your ego before it kills you.
Great explanation again.
Described me to T…
I have a theoretical problem with your definition of the LSI's ego block of - If I'm not mistaken - using Se Force as a tool to enforce Ti set of rules, systems, laws.
You end up having LSI as a type whose end point is the enforcing of logic on reality, which should logically be Te. You also end up with an introverted type whose end point is external: the state of external reality and its conformity to your inner intellectual formula. Again Te.
Logically, Ti, as an introverted logical "ought" should mainly have as an aim inner order. Which can be described as understanding (assembling of propositions based on logical links) which has to be descriptive of the outter world and not prescriptive as you describe, because it can't be both prescriptive of the inner and outter world at the same time.
Moreover, as an introverted function as a base, as an introverted type, LSI should have an introverted end point, since the base sets the end point/agenda. The way you describe it seems to be like the end point of LSI is extroverted (enforcing), which seems contradictory.
In my view, LSI and LII main focus should be the ordering (Logic/thinking) of their inner world (introverted), it's its own reward. Achieving understanding. The creative, like you said, is a tool for that aim, but here specifically (tools come as many forms) the creative is about the object of this ordering. Se creative for LSI make it so it's about ordering physical concrete things in their inner world. Basically what you said in your Se+Ti video of ordering bricks, except it's not in the outter world like it sounds in this video, but bricks in your head, which seems weird unless you want to get a concussion, but examples can be martial arts, or mechanics. Martial arts is about ordering sequences of concrete space movements in your head based on your opponents movements, basically this: ruclips.net/video/6vMO3XmNXe4/видео.html which highlights very well how internal it is. But you have to use Se to practice and reach that Ti understanding of the art. Just like mechanics where it's about the assembly of real physic concrete parts, but you have to use Se tinkering, real world dissassembling to map the workings of each parts in your head. LII the same but the context is the abstract.
So if what I said is true (based from your descriptions of the functions and also a lost of your block videos) then, you see how the Ti+Se diference seems odd as it seems to mix up extraversion and introversion, base and creative in a weird way, upside down like an extraverted Ti which is basically Te.
My way of speaking is very "prescriptive", but the whole comment is really a question: am I wrong and if so, where? I'm no expert and a lot of my resources on socionics and typology come from this channel, so please see no disrespect, thank you.
Does the PoLR stats change for any of the types? For instance, a PoLR Extroverted intuition (Ne) start thinking out side of the box and think about the world of possibilities?
MBTI confuses the 4 D Si demonstrative of an ISTJ as their lead function and then adds thinking characteristics to their definitions of Si to make sense of it for the introverts.
I have a theory that socionics demo functions are MBTI lead functions and that is actually how one translates types. Demo functions are obvious to other people, but not that relevant to the user. So LSI is ISTJ, IEI is INFP and so on.
t. LSI
Mbti was first so Socionics has no bearing on how it works.
5:30 sounds like Ti gone full Dominant Force. INTP (Myers code representation) myself has the same character through Ti. I find myself the more a convert to the ID bloc domain in settled situations.
are you going to make videos about intertype relationships?
We shall see.
You can find out about this by taking my course.
Correct title: "ISTj - Inspector - LSI - Not what you think it is"
Use of lower case is like an animal becoming nocturnal because it cannot compete in the daylight. It's inherently sub-optimal.
He means ISTP
@@Retrogamer71 But look at the predisposed role of the type: "Inspector". In SHS, LSI varies a lot: LSI-D is like the Initiator Guardian (TeSi = ESTJ), LSI-N is like the Contender Guardian (SiTe = ISTJ) and LSI-C is like the Contender Artisan (TiSe = ISTP) it even has Contender Artisan tropes in there such as mechanic and martial artist. I suggest you look at descriptions of LSI and SLI across many different schools of socionics to see how they vary. Then ask yourself: why do they vary?
@@BenVaserlan I'm happy with rude metaphor of paired function 'animals' in OPS.
@@Retrogamer71 I'm happy you're happy. Whatever floats your boat. :)
charm and charisma differ they are definitely charismatic but not necesarrily charming
Great as always Jack. However, I have a question.
Given that you describe the LSI as being adamant about their structure, to the point of stubbornness, why did you type Wittgenstein as an LSI? Sure he was known for being intense, but he was also notable for being possibly the only philosopher who has gone back to "destroy" their own philosophy, and build a completely new one on top of that. Hence the popular distinction between the early and late Wittgenstein.
I think this shows at least some valuing of Ne, given that he always showed constant obsessive thinking about problems, to the point where people described him as neurotic.
What do you think?
"constant obsessive thinking about problems" => is a doubly introverted process, detached from reality (Ti-Ni/Si). Extroverted intuition is the intuition of potential. Potential of external objects. Or in other words, instantiated and contingent objects that you cannot access just by being by yourself (like a Boltzmann brain) interfacing with the fundamental.
Ne:
1- An example of extroverted intuition is finding this video intriguing and seeking to learn more.
2- Another example of extroverted intuition is finding a gap in one's understanding, and then proceeding to seeking an answer elsewhere and in the instantiated (Ne), in contrast to filling the gap by yourself (Ni).
Ni:
1- An example of introverted intuition is interfacing with the infinite realm of all possible ideas and grabbing one that you found interesting to explore;
2- Another example consists in collecting factual data (on systems or people), and then seeing through the most likely outcome in the future, or what most likely happened in the past.
--------
Now in terms of Wittgenstein, neither Ne nor Se were present in what he was doing in his philosophy of mathematics. It was all very Ti, Ni and Si.
1- Ti thirst for structure and understanding,
2- Ti-Ni interest in the abstract, setting up of axioms and filling of the gaps.
3- Ti-Si building up of the conclusion based on the accumulation of simple, black and white or very well understood and established logical steps.
===> First Conclusion:
LSI or LII, he definitely wasn't a normal and healthy expression of his type. he is doubly detaching from the object, making him a super cognitive introvert. His Si need for clarity and certainty is too strong for LII and Ni over-exploration of the abstract is too strong for LSI.
The only way to determine the type would be to look at other areas (most of which we don't have access today):
1- Is he Si or Ni stubborn in the purest expressions of these information elements?
2- Quadra values.
3- How was his extroverted side expressed? Through Se or Ne?
4- Was his blind spot Ne or Se Second conclusion:
LSI seems to make a bit more sense than LII after all.
---------------------------------
TL'DR: There is a misconception in our understandings of Ne, provoked by what exists in the MBTI land.
Jack's typing of Wittgenstein is right.
Wittgenstein mistakenly thought he solved all philosophies problems when writing the Tractatus, and there was nothing more to say until it turned out that in fact there was. It took two of the greatest thinkers in the 20th century to poke holes in his solution which essentially led to his return as a full-time philosopher once again.
Norman Malcolm believed that a rude gesture gesticulated to Wittgenstein by Sraffa with a subsequent quip of what the logical form of that was opened the doorway for Wittgenstein revising, or revolutionising, his previous views. The earlier philosophy was so fixated on the logical analysis of propositions; it ignored the most basic and fundamental property of languages, communicating information in social settings. Communicating in social settings introduces ambiguity as an essential feature of communicating, making it impossible for a strict logical analysis of language impossible. Philosophy is a social and intellectual activity just read Plato's dialogues featuring Socrates. Aristotle's works are meant to be lecture notes, rather than stand alone full blown treatises which can be read irrespective of social activity. It's obvious that Wittgenstein has failed in his ambitions.
How much did Wittgenstein fail in initially solving philosophies problems? How compatible are the Tractatus and PI? Some philosophers believe they are compatible with PI showing a more mature and nuanced perspective of analysing language, essentially making the Tractatus a young man's work broadly right but too bold for its own good. Whereas others think they are two distinct philosophies. Ultimately either approaches taken by Wittgenstein are compatible with an LSI typing.
LSI's can be both deeply conservative and fierce radicals - even simultaneously. It quite conceivable for an LSI to modify their beliefs accounting for the new precisely so they can remain relevant - healthy dose of small-c conservatism. Likewise, they may detest a currently existing system, even one they created, and abolish it so they can create a better one. Once it became clear that his previous work didn't solve all the problems of philosophy, then either strategy would be open to an LSI.
He had a once in a lifetime, seismic shift in his whole philosophy. That's not the sign of someone who normally changes his mind.
@WorldSocionics Wittgenstein is the only philosopher who's biography made me cry because of how relatable he was. I also appreciated his radical shift of mind dedication to truth and clarity to the point of madness
Definitely me
So what is an ISTP? I don’t get where socionics gets its ideas from.
watch ISTP explained correctly. It gets its ideas from Jung, Kepinski, Augustinaviciute and others, but the main thing is the logical deduction from fundamental axioms.
But why do most MBTI experts say the opposite of what you/socionics says? Both can’t be right. You saying Myers Briggs got it wrong?
@@Coneman3 Yes, Myers Briggs definitely got it wrong. It's not a good system.
Or maybe you’ve created a different system to carve out your own niche following?
@@Coneman3 All I've done is try to arrange the various elements of Jungian typology into a coherent form with the highest possible explanatory power.
I'm new here. I'm confused here cN someone help out? Is this the same istj in mbti's definitely?
MBTI is nonsensical and the types in it are meaningless.
It can be, but it's not a given. Socionics and MBTI are two different systems that define functions and stack structure differently. I suggest studying the difference between the two before approaching socionics
So why does no one suggest LSI and IEI in a relationship , activity is a good romantic relationship it has all the nuances and my relationships with LSI is always Good it just never goes the distance beyond friendship (fuck buddies) but nevertheless is long lasting .
I agree, LSI here and I would prefer to date or have a situationship with an IEI female more than an EIE
Sounds Like me to a tee
entjj