Thank you for the video! These types seem really similar and the difference seems to lie mostly in the values. I'm LII, but with years I also started valuing the practical application of things. But I didn't manage to get rid of caring what people think about me too much. I very much prefer 1 on 1 conversations and prefer people with whom I have something in common. But I still have this annoying feeling of worry about what will someone think about me even if I don't care about those people at all. People also say I come off as harsh, so maybe vulnerable Se is not so non-existent, but rather I am unable to control it, so it comes out unwanted.
Now I know I'm an Lii for sure.. I still like gym and I eat to gain weight... But I do most of the stuff Lii people do. Especially researching and integrating ideas and systems... I did that with astrology with western and sidereal... I believed for a long time that people are their rising sign but that was my personal belief.. I am almost sure I'm Lii Intp(Mbti) INTj(Socionics)
Nice video, but I need to clarify a misunderstanding... LIIs (myself included) generally do not seek to be part of a group. It often leads to frustration. Even if we appear to be in a group, we usually maintain a psychological distance. Most of us adapt to our environments temporarily to achieve specific goals rather than fully fitting in. LIIs are more inclined to be researchers than social beings, leaning towards individualism over collectivism due to our dominant Ti, which contrasts sharply with Fe. For us, Ti is the primary focus, while Fe comes last. Additionally, not all LIIs struggle with autism. I am fully capable of engaging with anyone I meet and am quite adept at manipulating appearances using Ne-Fe.
As Lii I highly agree with the description of Fe- I was the most introverted guy in school and I wanted to fit in and have fun so I was obsessed with becomming an extrovert + also with being more forceful and confident because being weak makes you an easy target for bullying and because I stand up for my opinion much more and also because Si comfort zone causes stagnation.
So I think I'm an ILI but I relate to both approaches. I dive into theory but also try to see it's application and see how it would fit with my goals. I also build models and prototypes yet at the same I'm trying to see how those would solve problems. I also try to always adjust the models and test them always hence why I'm continously building such prototypes. I seem to have a mixed ILI LII approach. In normal extroverted communication I'm much more direct yet I'm highly theoretical and analytical when introverted. Within the socionics model it would make sense since both types have the same dimensionality of the functions Ni and Ti which is 4D. So maybe it's a matter of environment as well and personal development. Academia bores me. I prefer to see a correspondence between information and the way reality operates. More so I seem to want to hack reality with knowledge and information and to have the ability to bend it's laws.
My favorite theory of Gulenko is Types of Cognition. Which is extremely accurate in describing us LIIs as panoramic holographic thinking. We seek to integrate many different points of view to create a huge hologram (super system). Contrast this with the rigid + L causal-deterministic thinking of ILE Jack Aaron. Who thinks Socionics Model A is the one and only perfectly true system in typology. And that all causes of type behavior can be traced to Model A.
Academia is extremely competitive. Only 10 percent make it through to PhD that try. And even then in some arts programs for each professor job out there you can expect 50 applicants.
Getting people to like me is easy for me. Finding people I like is nearly impossible. I think it would be more accurate to say that it’s not the ILI that struggles to get people to like them. It’s everyone else who struggles to get the ILI to like THEM. And the LII struggles to get people to like them because they actually care about that and try to do that. Not sure why they struggle though. It’s not hard. People are so easy to appeal to. I think to be a successful ILI, you need to learn to be very fake and manipulative. Because if you were to be fully authentic, you would never get anywhere with anyone. The RUclips channel Joshua Fluke really encapsulates this reality very well. The fake social marketing bullshit is annoying, but it's far from hard. I really don’t relate to struggling with the social marketing game. It’s something I’m very good at, I just have 0 desire to do it unless someone has something I want. Then finally I have a reason to turn it on. Otherwise I’m very happy with no one liking me. It’s not important to me. I relate a lot more to your description of the LII as being very accepting and tolerant of people. Same. I would never call anyone a moron for example. Seems very narcissistic to describe people that way. I always play devils advocate about people and try to give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they didn’t know something. Maybe their skillset lies elsewhere. Maybe they’re a piece of shit asshole. But a moron? No such thing. I think I'm way more respectful of human intelligence than most people are. And way more self-deprecating than most people are. So I generally don't assume other people are stupid (and certainly not more stupid than I am - I'm pretty stupid myself).
@@lp3198 I wrote this nearly a year ago and just re-read it. I think I was a bit annoyed when I wrote it :P but I still agree with most of what I said. Do you have any comments or amendments you would make
Regarding adjustments and adhering to theory in LIIs, from personal experience and observations: no one is as capable of getting deeply disillusioned with theory as an LII. It comes both from exploring the theory in depth enough to see the loose ends and understanding how the theoretical sausage is made, but also from actually trying to faithfully apply it in the real world (for those working in a more pragmatic field). Even in that case, the adjustments look more like an ever-expanding set of footnotes to the baseline theory, sort of like epicycles, unless (or until) a better theory comes along. This sort of overcomplication annoys LIIs to no end and prompts them to look for or create something better and more elegant. Paradoxically, it's ILEs who end up rigidly adhering to theoretical models for longer. Their preference for breadth and moving on before the consequences hit prevents them from noticing contradictions.
Your videos are very helpful in understanding Socionics. Thank you. I am still trying to tell if I am LII or ILI. I cannot tell if I would be Se PoLR or Fe PoLR, because I think I am pretty bad at both. I lean towards LII because I am not usually inclined to forcing myself on my surroundings; I prefer carefully persuading someone. But the way Jack describes Ne does not match me at all; his description of Ni is much closer. And the case-by-case nature of Te and Fi he describes makes more sense than a one-size-fits-all mentality of Ti, Fe
Many LIIs are not naturally drawn to academia in the traditional sense. We have diverse interests and often find the conventional educational system unappealing, let alone fully integrating into it. Many LIIs pursue careers as fashion designers, engineers, freelancers, content creators, actors, and more. We tend to reject societal norms and prefer to carve out our own paths. Personally, I detest math and find traditional education both boring and irrelevant. We are natural autodidacts, focusing on learning things that align with our inherent structure. Most of us gather and use information to navigate life on our own terms, rather than conforming to societal systems. Please get the facts right.
I'm not convinced that Socionics' types are one-to-one corresponding MBTI types. rationality in Socionocs is not the same as J-P in cumbersome MBTI notation
Can someone please tell me, is it possible to be an ILI who is also an INTP in mbti? That would mean Ni + Te user in socionics but Ti + Ne in mbti. Im overall more LII but my online friends gaslight me into thinking im ILI, idk what to believe anymore. I know for 100% fact that in mbti im INTP
im 1000000% intp in mbti but ili fits me more than lii, idk is it actually possible for me be intp mbti and ili socio? I mean its Ti-Ne vs Ni-Te!? Pls help
No, absolutely not. The most important characteristic in all the theories based on the Psychological Types of Jung is the dominant or base function, in LII is Ti and in ILI is Ni, it's very simple.
Thank you for the video! These types seem really similar and the difference seems to lie mostly in the values. I'm LII, but with years I also started valuing the practical application of things. But I didn't manage to get rid of caring what people think about me too much. I very much prefer 1 on 1 conversations and prefer people with whom I have something in common. But I still have this annoying feeling of worry about what will someone think about me even if I don't care about those people at all. People also say I come off as harsh, so maybe vulnerable Se is not so non-existent, but rather I am unable to control it, so it comes out unwanted.
Now I know I'm an Lii for sure.. I still like gym and I eat to gain weight...
But I do most of the stuff Lii people do.
Especially researching and integrating ideas and systems... I did that with astrology with western and sidereal... I believed for a long time that people are their rising sign but that was my personal belief.. I am almost sure I'm Lii Intp(Mbti) INTj(Socionics)
Great vid man, prob only Socionics channel I regularly watch
Nice video, but I need to clarify a misunderstanding...
LIIs (myself included) generally do not seek to be part of a group. It often leads to frustration. Even if we appear to be in a group, we usually maintain a psychological distance. Most of us adapt to our environments temporarily to achieve specific goals rather than fully fitting in.
LIIs are more inclined to be researchers than social beings, leaning towards individualism over collectivism due to our dominant Ti, which contrasts sharply with Fe. For us, Ti is the primary focus, while Fe comes last.
Additionally, not all LIIs struggle with autism. I am fully capable of engaging with anyone I meet and am quite adept at manipulating appearances using Ne-Fe.
Such helpful channel, thank you. I am just getting started with socionics and your videos help a lot!!
As Lii I highly agree with the description of Fe- I was the most introverted guy in school and I wanted to fit in and have fun so I was obsessed with becomming an extrovert + also with being more forceful and confident because being weak makes you an easy target for bullying and because I stand up for my opinion much more and also because Si comfort zone causes stagnation.
So I think I'm an ILI but I relate to both approaches. I dive into theory but also try to see it's application and see how it would fit with my goals.
I also build models and prototypes yet at the same I'm trying to see how those would solve problems. I also try to always adjust the models and test them always hence why I'm continously building such prototypes.
I seem to have a mixed ILI LII approach.
In normal extroverted communication I'm much more direct yet I'm highly theoretical and analytical when introverted.
Within the socionics model it would make sense since both types have the same dimensionality of the functions Ni and Ti which is 4D. So maybe it's a matter of environment as well and personal development.
Academia bores me. I prefer to see a correspondence between information and the way reality operates. More so I seem to want to hack reality with knowledge and information and to have the ability to bend it's laws.
My favorite theory of Gulenko is Types of Cognition. Which is extremely accurate in describing us LIIs as panoramic holographic thinking. We seek to integrate many different points of view to create a huge hologram (super system).
Contrast this with the rigid + L causal-deterministic thinking of ILE Jack Aaron. Who thinks Socionics Model A is the one and only perfectly true system in typology. And that all causes of type behavior can be traced to Model A.
Actually I find ILIs are more likely to be professors than LIIs because ILIs can better focus on mastering one subject through Ni.
Accurate description of me as an LII.
Academia is extremely competitive. Only 10 percent make it through to PhD that try. And even then in some arts programs for each professor job out there you can expect 50 applicants.
It's no Ukrainian battlefield but I definitely lol'd at 25:50
Yes it is
Getting people to like me is easy for me. Finding people I like is nearly impossible. I think it would be more accurate to say that it’s not the ILI that struggles to get people to like them. It’s everyone else who struggles to get the ILI to like THEM. And the LII struggles to get people to like them because they actually care about that and try to do that. Not sure why they struggle though. It’s not hard. People are so easy to appeal to. I think to be a successful ILI, you need to learn to be very fake and manipulative. Because if you were to be fully authentic, you would never get anywhere with anyone. The RUclips channel Joshua Fluke really encapsulates this reality very well. The fake social marketing bullshit is annoying, but it's far from hard.
I really don’t relate to struggling with the social marketing game. It’s something I’m very good at, I just have 0 desire to do it unless someone has something I want. Then finally I have a reason to turn it on. Otherwise I’m very happy with no one liking me. It’s not important to me. I relate a lot more to your description of the LII as being very accepting and tolerant of people. Same. I would never call anyone a moron for example. Seems very narcissistic to describe people that way. I always play devils advocate about people and try to give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they didn’t know something. Maybe their skillset lies elsewhere. Maybe they’re a piece of shit asshole. But a moron? No such thing. I think I'm way more respectful of human intelligence than most people are. And way more self-deprecating than most people are. So I generally don't assume other people are stupid (and certainly not more stupid than I am - I'm pretty stupid myself).
Give this ILI a medal
@@lp3198 I wrote this nearly a year ago and just re-read it. I think I was a bit annoyed when I wrote it :P but I still agree with most of what I said. Do you have any comments or amendments you would make
LII doesn't try hard, what are you on about?
Regarding adjustments and adhering to theory in LIIs, from personal experience and observations: no one is as capable of getting deeply disillusioned with theory as an LII. It comes both from exploring the theory in depth enough to see the loose ends and understanding how the theoretical sausage is made, but also from actually trying to faithfully apply it in the real world (for those working in a more pragmatic field). Even in that case, the adjustments look more like an ever-expanding set of footnotes to the baseline theory, sort of like epicycles, unless (or until) a better theory comes along. This sort of overcomplication annoys LIIs to no end and prompts them to look for or create something better and more elegant.
Paradoxically, it's ILEs who end up rigidly adhering to theoretical models for longer. Their preference for breadth and moving on before the consequences hit prevents them from noticing contradictions.
Your videos are very helpful in understanding Socionics. Thank you.
I am still trying to tell if I am LII or ILI. I cannot tell if I would be Se PoLR or Fe PoLR, because I think I am pretty bad at both. I lean towards LII because I am not usually inclined to forcing myself on my surroundings; I prefer carefully persuading someone. But the way Jack describes Ne does not match me at all; his description of Ni is much closer. And the case-by-case nature of Te and Fi he describes makes more sense than a one-size-fits-all mentality of Ti, Fe
Many LIIs are not naturally drawn to academia in the traditional sense. We have diverse interests and often find the conventional educational system unappealing, let alone fully integrating into it. Many LIIs pursue careers as fashion designers, engineers, freelancers, content creators, actors, and more. We tend to reject societal norms and prefer to carve out our own paths. Personally, I detest math and find traditional education both boring and irrelevant.
We are natural autodidacts, focusing on learning things that align with our inherent structure. Most of us gather and use information to navigate life on our own terms, rather than conforming to societal systems. Please get the facts right.
SLI vs LII
24:09 ese acento yo lo conozco 😭
haha pepito lopez
I'm not convinced that Socionics' types are one-to-one corresponding MBTI types. rationality in Socionocs is not the same as J-P in cumbersome MBTI notation
Can someone please tell me, is it possible to be an ILI who is also an INTP in mbti? That would mean Ni + Te user in socionics but Ti + Ne in mbti. Im overall more LII but my online friends gaslight me into thinking im ILI, idk what to believe anymore.
I know for 100% fact that in mbti im INTP
Yes it is possible
Yes. According to DCNH , some subtype of ILI have their Ti accentuated
@@Vinceira Are you referring to the DCNH approach ? If so, then I’d agree that it’s not a good system.
Where can i take an accurate test
im 1000000% intp in mbti but ili fits me more than lii, idk is it actually possible for me be intp mbti and ili socio? I mean its Ti-Ne vs Ni-Te!? Pls help
Yes it’s possible. They’re close enough types to be understandably confused for one another.
I am Lii intj i think intps are ILI .
na it can always be either
No, absolutely not. The most important characteristic in all the theories based on the Psychological Types of Jung is the dominant or base function, in LII is Ti and in ILI is Ni, it's very simple.