Friedrich Nietzsche ~ Sakinorva Databank

Friedrich Nietzsche

Philosopher

Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

function

ennea

variant

socio

psyche

INTJ 20

5w4 20

4w5 5

6w5 1

sx/sp 7

sx/so 5

sp/sx 2

EIE 12

IEI 8

ILI 2

LSI 1

EFVL 3

ELVF 2

EVFL 1

LEVF 1

total votes 129

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold	bold
italic	italic
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"	[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
	(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}

	Lvna 2019/01/15 (Tue) 18:13:37 #4650
	I think this is also a good case study in some issues with mbti and enneagram. Nietzsche has become the golden standard on the internet for “458” tritype, and that reflects a treasuring of his mental perspective over what we can know about him as a person. Here we see a central failure of typology, the tendency to characterize an entire self based upon a creative/intelectual output, ironically the result of that is reducing someone to their impact in the world...maybe a part of this fears this is the only existentially valid part of our existence, but if you look into people more holistically that illusion fades to a certain extent, even though it’s true output is important. In the case of Nietzsche, this accomplishes the strange feet of martyrizing him, something he knew was very likely to occur. We begin to see his output as a vindication for living our lives a certain way, daring to take small steps into our own archetypal natures, and reflecting what we see as our own solutions onto this character. But he wasn’t just an ideal mirror, even if he too had his ideal mirrors. Reducing him to 451 also feels stupid, but it also accomplishes seeing him more in the context of his own life which is a step in the right direction. Would even help you to imagine conversing with him or relating to him.

Editing post #4650 by Lvna <p>I think this is also a good case study in some issues with mbti and enneagram. Nietzsche has become the golden standard on the internet for “458” tritype, and that reflects a treasuring of his mental perspective over what we can know about him as a person. Here we see a central failure of typology, the tendency to characterize an entire self based upon a creative/intelectual output, ironically the result of that is reducing someone to their impact in the world...maybe a part of this fears this is the only existentially valid part of our existence, but if you look into people more holistically that illusion fades to a certain extent, even though it’s true output is important. In the case of Nietzsche, this accomplishes the strange feet of martyrizing him, something he knew was very likely to occur. We begin to see his output as a vindication for living our lives a certain way, daring to take small steps into our own archetypal natures, and reflecting what we see as our own solutions onto this character. But he wasn’t just an ideal mirror, even if he too had his ideal mirrors. Reducing him to 451 also feels stupid, but it also accomplishes seeing him more in the context of his own life which is a step in the right direction. Would even help you to imagine conversing with him or relating to him. </p>
Replying to post #4650 by Lvna

	Lvna 2019/01/15 (Tue) 18:07:28 #4649
	If we typed Nietzsche by the sort of individual he idolized we would probably emerge with an 8 in his tritype: yes, the will to power sounds quite 8ish on the surface, and his positive categorizations of individuals like Napoleon do too. From an ideological standpoint, it doesn’t make sense that Nietzsche would be a 1, considering the freedom he sought from morality. That said, his obsession with morality shouldn’t be taken at face value as signifying non-1; sometimes it’s what we most dislike in ourselves that we rebel against ideologically. in reality Nietzsche has been described as a well-mannered, shy individual. Certain stories like the one fg posted about the coal contradict this, but if you read into reports of how he acted during his time writing in the alps, this is the picture that emerges...we don’t find someone who was explosive and domineering at all. In a similar sense, Nietzsche idealized a figure like Goethe, even though he lacked the feeling bent of someone like him. We see a 1-ishness emerge in Nietzsche with his desire for personal perfection and strong work ethic. His well-crafted letters to his family show a side that won’t sacrifice his own ideology for the comfort of others, but does acknowledge the pain in this proposition. He asks to speak about non-divisive manners, looking for interpersonal harmony with his family and obsessing over this pursuit. Precision and care are features of a one. Secondly, we can look into his incredibly structured daily program as an indication of 1-ishness. He awoke and slept at the same time daily, wrote during the same times, exercised with his glacier walks at the same time, and focused heavily on eating specific things to preserve the order of his body. All of these demonstrate a desire for personal control, executed through self control OVER control of others. Furthermore, his inability of living up to his own personal expectations and need to overcome these tendencies demonstrates the link between his strong 4 side and his one side. But the last point that to me makes me see him as a 1 in his tritype is a theme between ones and eights: contrast abstraction to arrive at ideology (1) with action to arrive at ideology (8); contrast a life of repressed and intellectually articulated anger (1), with constant expression of anger and a desire to move past specific angers (8). While Nietzsche desired to overcome morality, he still harbored what many moralists do: a desire to improve reality and to set the conditions of how this must be done. As with many philosophers, his life focused heavily on ameliorating his anger at the world by diagnosing its issues in a careful manner, and ultimately taking a holier than thou perspective against those whose imperfection rendered them unable to create a world that reflected his strong ideals. Read into the Sx 1 and Sp 1 descriptions and you’ll see more of what I’m saying. Yes, Nietzsche’s ideology did take on an 8ish flavor. But that doesn’t mean he was an 8. Nietzsche was born in a time when religion was clearly hanging on by a thread, and no longer promising the supposed kingdom it once could. He clearly felt this issue personally, and wanted to will into existence a perspective that could usurp its failures. Ironically, his preoccupation with the world and anger towards it aren’t very different from the sentiments of moralists, religious or rational-axiomatic, but his way of envisioning a replacement to morality the way we knew it was quite original, and very heavily 4>1. But still, he did not act like an 8, even if he admired these types.

Editing post #4649 by Lvna <p>If we typed Nietzsche by the sort of individual he idolized we would probably emerge with an 8 in his tritype: yes, the will to power sounds quite 8ish on the surface, and his positive categorizations of individuals like Napoleon do too. From an ideological standpoint, it doesn’t make sense that Nietzsche would be a 1, considering the freedom he sought from morality. That said, his obsession with morality shouldn’t be taken at face value as signifying non-1; sometimes it’s what we most dislike in ourselves that we rebel against ideologically. in reality Nietzsche has been described as a well-mannered, shy individual. Certain stories like the one fg posted about the coal contradict this, but if you read into reports of how he acted during his time writing in the alps, this is the picture that emerges...we don’t find someone who was explosive and domineering at all. In a similar sense, Nietzsche idealized a figure like Goethe, even though he lacked the feeling bent of someone like him. </p> <p>We see a 1-ishness emerge in Nietzsche with his desire for personal perfection and strong work ethic. His well-crafted letters to his family show a side that won’t sacrifice his own ideology for the comfort of others, but does acknowledge the pain in this proposition. He asks to speak about non-divisive manners, looking for interpersonal harmony with his family and obsessing over this pursuit. Precision and care are features of a one. Secondly, we can look into his incredibly structured daily program as an indication of 1-ishness. He awoke and slept at the same time daily, wrote during the same times, exercised with his glacier walks at the same time, and focused heavily on eating specific things to preserve the order of his body. All of these demonstrate a desire for personal control, executed through self control OVER control of others. Furthermore, his inability of living up to his own personal expectations and need to overcome these tendencies demonstrates the link between his strong 4 side and his one side. </p> <p>But the last point that to me makes me see him as a 1 in his tritype is a theme between ones and eights: contrast abstraction to arrive at ideology (1) with action to arrive at ideology (8); contrast a life of repressed and intellectually articulated anger (1), with constant expression of anger and a desire to move past specific angers (8). While Nietzsche desired to overcome morality, he still harbored what many moralists do: a desire to improve reality and to set the conditions of how this must be done. As with many philosophers, his life focused heavily on ameliorating his anger at the world by diagnosing its issues in a careful manner, and ultimately taking a holier than thou perspective against those whose imperfection rendered them unable to create a world that reflected his strong ideals. Read into the Sx 1 and Sp 1 descriptions and you’ll see more of what I’m saying. </p> <p>Yes, Nietzsche’s ideology did take on an 8ish flavor. But that doesn’t mean he was an 8. Nietzsche was born in a time when religion was clearly hanging on by a thread, and no longer promising the supposed kingdom it once could. He clearly felt this issue personally, and wanted to will into existence a perspective that could usurp its failures. Ironically, his preoccupation with the world and anger towards it aren’t very different from the sentiments of moralists, religious or rational-axiomatic, but his way of envisioning a replacement to morality the way we knew it was quite original, and very heavily 4>1. But still, he did not act like an 8, even if he admired these types. </p>
Replying to post #4649 by Lvna

	LVNA 2018/10/28 (Sun) 17:48:59 #3878
	So I saw some reference to Nietzsche in the chat recently, and he’s a subject I really haven’t thought about for awhile, but after thinking more about him I do agree in socionics he is in fact EIE. I think first it’s worth noting fg is absolutely correct IxI typings make zero sense for Nietzsche. Those types correspond almost exclusively to the aesthetic variant of Jung’s Ni type, which I think is reflected by categorization of these types as very “inert.” If you’re going to devote your life to imagination, you may not even find a way to express it or even care to do so, or if you do, it would likely come in some more abstract form (the lyrical poet/musician IEI, or the pessimistic author ILI stereotypes fit here). I’ll get to why Fi in Nietzsche’s quadra is absolutely laughable later, but it’s impossible to say Nietzsche would even fit IEI. Maybe a younger Nietzsche could, but I’m doubt it. So now we get to the LxI typings of Nietzsche, which I also think are idiotic. Many have made the argument he was LSI, but I think that typing is a reflection of the initial perspective of socionics, which seemed to type based upon people’s effects on the world. Yes, Nietzsche’s philosophies have influenced many so-called “Ubermenschen,” the Nazi regime, and other arguably conservative empowered people (eyes on Jordan Peterson). These people seem so not self-conscious they unknowingly fall into Nietzsche’s own conception of ressentiment. Accepting their birth into a position of Master Morality, they ultimately make themselves resistant to personal change and the use of imagination to create an entirely new conception of life and the world, and in the process enforce the status quo (LSI incarnate activity). But should we really be typing Nietzsche based on the ultimate results of his philosophy that have tended to reinforcement of conservative norms? I’d argue no. In fact, Nietzsche would probably not be at all surprised at this, as he recognized how few people would be capable of self-overcoming to such an extent that they would use his philosophy to empower themselves only after feeling their personal tensions and re-imagining the world and their place in it. So I doubt he would be surprised people would misinterpret his work to simply give credence to the privileged self the world already defined and created for them. And if that’s the case, then it begs the question: why in the fuck did this jackass even write, if he knew so many of his concepts could be misinterpreted by people he would detest? To say he didn’t get this would be to paint an incredibly naive picture of the man, and ultimately says to me he was writing for a reason that went beyond trying to influence the world. In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche in no way conceals the fact that the point of this undertaking deals with the age old truth that at some point, after a student becomes their own teacher, they must become a teacher themselves. Expressing oneself and becoming a teacher is a psychological tool to return from the depths of inner exploration to the world itself. Scientists doubting Nietzsche’s sanity have a different, but parallel interpretation: Nietzsche was expressing his psychosis in order to avoid experiencing it. Whichever way you look at it, it’s clear a lot of Nietzsche’s writing was done under the guise of improving his own psychological health and therefore for himself. If this weren’t the case, he could have written his philosophy in a much less ambiguous way that could foment actual change in the world exactly how he wanted it (something you see consistently with LxIs). Instead, if Nietzsche were alive to today, he would probably simply troll and laugh hysterically at the self-declared Ubermenschen who read the theory and describe themselves as such without having actually sought themselves. Such people tend to be caught up in waging wars to identify themselves as something discrete and unbreakable and require the validation of others for this identity, because ultimately it draws from an external, and not internal self-imagination. Galaxy /senses/ he has uncovered the Truth of Nietzsche by reverting to Aushra’s initial LII typing. But this is also quite a problematic typing, as it brings Nietzsche once more into the realm of Jung. The basis of Jung’s theory was ultimately anti-individualistic as Strawberry suggested recently. This can be seen exquisitely in Jung’s interpretations of Nietzsche...Jung loved using Nietzsche’s concepts, visions and metaphors as exemplars of “the forces underlying Europe.” He liked to say “Nietzsche had an incredible sense for the future” and that his writings reflected “the return of Wotan” etc. But did Nietzsche actually engage in such LII feats? Put another way, was he a person who above all else, used his imagination in order to abstract the currents of the world? It’s not an awful argument, because Nietzsche does do this, but again, it was not his primary focus because, unlike Jung, his 6ishness was quite low. Nietzsche seemed to care about the currents of the world insomuch as they related to his place in it and put him in an existential conundrum as to how to respond to and comment on the issues plaguing his era. But he ultimately gave more of a fuck about his individual place and his own self development than about reducing his identity to interpretations of the modern world that allow someone to create a concrete identity for themselves as so many philosophers (the stereotypical LII type) do. His incredibly fourish nature can be seen in a work like The Birth of Tragedy, which argues against abstracting a model of reality from perceptual impressions and instead intensifying them for the sake of the individual. Nietzsche loved his visceral responses to phenomena and believed that life would not be worth living without music. Again, this is quite not LII. So what can we say of Nietzsche’s imagination? What can we say of his luscious metaphors that led to poetry, published and unpublished, and his relationships that led to many musical compositions? In many senses I think the answer is nothing that you or I could interpret, because these are part of a highly internal journey that has been painted as focused on interpreting the world because of his occupation (Oh yes, I know how we Americans adore saying: “HEEEY BISH WHAT U DO FOR A LIVING I BROUGHT U A PIE WELCOME TO ZE NEIGHBORHOOD! xD) But if we can say one thing, it almost always amounted to authentic expression. Here we return to why Nietzsche is one of the greatest subjectivists and OBVIOUSLY not Fi valuing. Nietzsche broke with so many friends and family members and suffered a great deal because of this (something that would indicate strong socionics Fi, but devalued). Instead, he never failed to express the full weight of his passionate emotions through his personal letters and philosophy. This is in fact basically how Beta Fe, and more specifically EIE is described in socionics. And here I would say we can introduce the concept of the Ubermesnchen again. What if Nietzsche were not the typical philosopher who would tout such a concept because of simple hope for the world? Nietzsche emblematizes selfishness with the goal of staying as true as possible to oneself and one’s development without going insane...ie with continuing to have some relation to the world and its beauty and its possibility. So I’d like to propose some alternate idea: the Ubermensch were Nietzsche’s imaginary realm of friends he could relate to, because he refused to sacrifice his visceral feelings his whole life to actually relate to anyone living. Yes, yes, this is a very sad thing, and certainly not something I can relate to (wait though, I do write a lot about characters so hmm...do online friends count tho #PDLOVE53ver), but it seems as though it were ultimately true to Nietzsche. And that brings me to the crux of why I REALLY WANT to type Nietzsche as EIE. This is because typing him as LII or LSI or anything like that IGNORES who he was and the type of person (above philosopher) he was trying to be. Jung did an INCREDIBLE disservice to the spirit of Nietzsche by treating him like other philosophers...putting attention above all else on his diagnoses of the world and its issues. By interpreting N’s imagination archetypally in the Zarathustra seminar he in essence REVERSES EVERYTHING N. STOOD FOR! He denies N’s imagination as a tool to walk the line between sanity and insanity and instead freezes him in his era of birth and the relevance he had to shaping it. FUck that! How can you do that with someone who says “I sought myself” as a summation for their life? IDEK what the point of this post is anymore, but I think part of it is to call out the idiocy of socionics and Jung-ness and all that jazz. Ultimately, an EIE typing is dumb too, but yk it’s a passionate motherfucking type that expresses their emotions and is not a dominate aesthete and would probably engage with philosophy in order to viscerally react to it to...oh god running out of breath here....find their own personal likes and dislikes by doing it...and ooh maybe conceal the fact that ultimately they think it’s stupid, hilarious, useless, and potentially useful to kindred spirits who stumble on it and also feel viscerally, but are not accessible to be found just yet because the internet doesn’t exist and democracy has not yet bequeathed unto us a beautiful era of limitless self expression. Instead, maybe we should be interpreting Nietzsche and his ideas...gasp...in relation to himself? As a case study of a life he thought was possible for others? Could it be!? Could we maybe put down our well oiled tools of cultural analysis and look at a life in its own context? Oh, but he’s a philosopher and not an artist, so I guess not. I guess I’m pushing this EIE button as fuck u to Carl. I guess I’m saying maybe you should push this EIE button too because it makes no sense but makes a lot of sense and maybe has the potential to fuck up this dumb system that is so anti-Nietzschean in the first place and maybe bring a smile to his face or to your own because you are him (eternal return of the same, the eternal return shall never be in vain...anyone wanna add onto this song?) Well, have fun 24 bitchez..I’m outty (but actually I’m an inny hehehe).

Editing post #3878 by LVNA <p><strong>So I saw some reference to Nietzsche in the chat recently, and he’s a subject I really haven’t thought about for awhile, but after thinking more about him I do agree in socionics he is in fact EIE. I think first it’s worth noting fg is absolutely correct IxI typings make zero sense for Nietzsche. Those types correspond almost exclusively to the aesthetic variant of Jung’s Ni type, which I think is reflected by categorization of these types as very “inert.” If you’re going to devote your life to imagination, you may not even find a way to express it or even care to do so, or if you do, it would likely come in some more abstract form (the lyrical poet/musician IEI, or the pessimistic author ILI stereotypes fit here). I’ll get to why Fi in Nietzsche’s quadra is absolutely laughable later, but it’s impossible to say Nietzsche would even fit IEI. Maybe a younger Nietzsche could, but I’m doubt it.</strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>So now we get to the LxI typings of Nietzsche, which I also think are idiotic. Many have made the argument he was LSI, but I think that typing is a reflection of the initial perspective of socionics, which seemed to type based upon people’s effects on the world. Yes, Nietzsche’s philosophies have influenced many so-called “Ubermenschen,” the Nazi regime, and other arguably conservative empowered people (eyes on Jordan Peterson). These people seem so not self-conscious they unknowingly fall into Nietzsche’s own conception of ressentiment. Accepting their birth into a position of Master Morality, they ultimately make themselves resistant to personal change and the use of imagination to create an entirely new conception of life and the world, and in the process enforce the status quo (LSI incarnate activity). But should we really be typing Nietzsche based on the ultimate results of his philosophy that have tended to reinforcement of conservative norms? I’d argue no. In fact, Nietzsche would probably not be at all surprised at this, as he recognized how few people would be capable of self-overcoming to such an extent that they would use his philosophy to empower themselves only after feeling their personal tensions and re-imagining the world and their place in it. So I doubt he would be surprised people would misinterpret his work to simply give credence to the privileged self the world already defined and created for them. </strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>And if that’s the case, then it begs the question: why in the fuck did this jackass even write, if he knew so many of his concepts could be misinterpreted by people he would detest? To say he didn’t get this would be to paint an incredibly naive picture of the man, and ultimately says to me he was writing for a reason that went beyond trying to influence the world. In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche in no way conceals the fact that the point of this undertaking deals with the age old truth that at some point, after a student becomes their own teacher, they must become a teacher themselves. Expressing oneself and becoming a teacher is a psychological tool to return from the depths of inner exploration to the world itself. Scientists doubting Nietzsche’s sanity have a different, but parallel interpretation: Nietzsche was expressing his psychosis in order to avoid experiencing it. Whichever way you look at it, it’s clear a lot of Nietzsche’s writing was done under the guise of improving his own psychological health and therefore for himself. If this weren’t the case, he could have written his philosophy in a much less ambiguous way that could foment actual change in the world exactly how he wanted it (something you see consistently with LxIs). Instead, if Nietzsche were alive to today, he would probably simply troll and laugh hysterically at the self-declared Ubermenschen who read the theory and describe themselves as such without having actually sought themselves. Such people tend to be caught up in waging wars to identify themselves as something discrete and unbreakable and require the validation of others for this identity, because ultimately it draws from an external, and not internal self-imagination. </strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Galaxy /senses/ he has uncovered the Truth of Nietzsche by reverting to Aushra’s initial LII typing. But this is also quite a problematic typing, as it brings Nietzsche once more into the realm of Jung. The basis of Jung’s theory was ultimately anti-individualistic as Strawberry suggested recently. This can be seen exquisitely in Jung’s interpretations of Nietzsche...Jung loved using Nietzsche’s concepts, visions and metaphors as exemplars of “the forces underlying Europe.” He liked to say “Nietzsche had an incredible sense for the future” and that his writings reflected “the return of Wotan” etc. But did Nietzsche actually engage in such LII feats? Put another way, was he a person who above all else, used his imagination in order to abstract the currents of the world? It’s not an awful argument, because Nietzsche does do this, but again, it was not his primary focus because, unlike Jung, his 6ishness was quite low. Nietzsche seemed to care about the currents of the world insomuch as they related to his place in it and put him in an existential conundrum as to how to respond to and comment on the issues plaguing his era. But he ultimately gave more of a fuck about his individual place and his own self development than about reducing his identity to interpretations of the modern world that allow someone to create a concrete identity for themselves as so many philosophers (the stereotypical LII type) do. His incredibly fourish nature can be seen in a work like The Birth of Tragedy, which argues against abstracting a model of reality from perceptual impressions and instead intensifying them for the sake of the individual. Nietzsche loved his visceral responses to phenomena and believed that life would not be worth living without music. Again, this is quite not LII. </strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>So what can we say of Nietzsche’s imagination? What can we say of his luscious metaphors that led to poetry, published and unpublished, and his relationships that led to many musical compositions? In many senses I think the answer is nothing that you or I could interpret, because these are part of a highly internal journey that has been painted as focused on interpreting the world because of his occupation (Oh yes, I know how we Americans adore saying: “HEEEY BISH WHAT U DO FOR A LIVING I BROUGHT U A PIE WELCOME TO ZE NEIGHBORHOOD! xD) But if we can say one thing, it almost always amounted to authentic expression. Here we return to why Nietzsche is one of the greatest subjectivists and OBVIOUSLY not Fi valuing. Nietzsche broke with so many friends and family members and suffered a great deal because of this (something that would indicate strong socionics Fi, but devalued). Instead, he never failed to express the full weight of his passionate emotions through his personal letters and philosophy. This is in fact basically how Beta Fe, and more specifically EIE is described in socionics. And here I would say we can introduce the concept of the Ubermesnchen again. What if Nietzsche were not the typical philosopher who would tout such a concept because of simple hope for the world? Nietzsche emblematizes selfishness with the goal of staying as true as possible to oneself and one’s development without going insane...ie with continuing to have some relation to the world and its beauty and its possibility. So I’d like to propose some alternate idea: the Ubermensch were Nietzsche’s imaginary realm of friends he could relate to, because he refused to sacrifice his visceral feelings his whole life to actually relate to anyone living. Yes, yes, this is a very sad thing, and certainly not something I can relate to (wait though, I do write a lot about characters so hmm...do online friends count tho #PDLOVE53ver), but it seems as though it were ultimately true to Nietzsche. </strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>And that brings me to the crux of why I REALLY WANT to type Nietzsche as EIE. This is because typing him as LII or LSI or anything like that IGNORES who he was and the type of person (above philosopher) he was trying to be. Jung did an INCREDIBLE disservice to the spirit of Nietzsche by treating him like other philosophers...putting attention above all else on his diagnoses of the world and its issues. By interpreting N’s imagination archetypally in the Zarathustra seminar he in essence REVERSES EVERYTHING N. STOOD FOR! He denies N’s imagination as a tool to walk the line between sanity and insanity and instead freezes him in his era of birth and the relevance he had to shaping it. FUck that! How can you do that with someone who says “I sought myself” as a summation for their life? IDEK what the point of this post is anymore, but I think part of it is to call out the idiocy of socionics and Jung-ness and all that jazz. Ultimately, an EIE typing is dumb too, but yk it’s a passionate motherfucking type that expresses their emotions and is not a dominate aesthete and would probably engage with philosophy in order to viscerally react to it to...oh god running out of breath here....find their own personal likes and dislikes by doing it...and ooh maybe conceal the fact that ultimately they think it’s stupid, hilarious, useless, and potentially useful to kindred spirits who stumble on it and also feel viscerally, but are not accessible to be found just yet because the internet doesn’t exist and democracy has not yet bequeathed unto us a beautiful era of limitless self expression. Instead, maybe we should be interpreting Nietzsche and his ideas...gasp...in relation to himself? As a case study of a life he thought was possible for others? Could it be!? Could we maybe put down our well oiled tools of cultural analysis and look at a life in its own context? Oh, but he’s a philosopher and not an artist, so I guess not. I guess I’m pushing this EIE button as fuck u to Carl. I guess I’m saying maybe you should push this EIE button too because it makes no sense but makes a lot of sense and maybe has the potential to fuck up this dumb system that is so anti-Nietzschean in the first place and maybe bring a smile to his face or to your own because you are him (eternal return of the same, the eternal return shall never be in vain...anyone wanna add onto this song?) Well, have fun 24 bitchez..I’m outty (but actually I’m an inny hehehe). </strong></p> <p><br /> </p>
Replying to post #3878 by LVNA

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2018/07/12 (Thu) 03:23:58 #2092
	Nietzsche hate a lot of gamma value , his crirticism of christianism is against it. he disliked the punitive and moralistic axe of gamma and was totally dispizing of socio Fi. socio Fi evaluate needs of other and it's own and are Fi valuer are often caregiver . that's why the LIE-Ni or ILI-Ni description seem so "F" . why do you choose vera's description of quadra instead of the traditionnal one, maybe this can indicate why."However, quite a few socionists and socionics hobbyists have criticized Stratiyevskaya for portraying types of Gamma quadra in more positive light while exaggerating the weaknesses or peculiarities of types from other quadra. This is most likely explainable by her own type being ESI; thus, her depictions of types and intertype relations are said to be most accurate for Gamma types. Reading her profiles and intertype relationship descriptions pertaining to types from other quadra, especially Alpha, it should be kept in mind that she has written these from the point of view of an outside observer that does not provide a completely objective view. "

Editing post #2092 by fg <p>Nietzsche hate a lot of gamma value , his crirticism of christianism is against it. he disliked the punitive and moralistic axe of gamma and was totally dispizing of socio Fi. socio Fi evaluate needs of other and it's own and are Fi valuer are often caregiver . that's why the LIE-Ni or ILI-Ni description seem so "F" . why do you choose vera's description of quadra instead of the traditionnal one, maybe this can indicate why."However, quite a few socionists and socionics hobbyists have criticized Stratiyevskaya for portraying types of <a href="http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Gamma">Gamma quadra</a> in more positive light while exaggerating the weaknesses or peculiarities of types from other quadra. This is most likely explainable by her own type being <a href="http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=ESI">ESI</a>; thus, her depictions of types and intertype relations are said to be most accurate for Gamma types. Reading her profiles and intertype relationship descriptions pertaining to types from other quadra, especially Alpha, it should be kept in mind that she has written these from the point of view of an outside observer that does not provide a completely objective view. "</p>
Replying to post #2092 by fg

diobono int 5w4 ili 2018/07/08 (Sun) 09:28:20 #1905
The way he talks about hierarchies doesn't necessarily mean beta. Idefinitely see Gamma first for him.I mean going by Vera what's her surname: Gamma Quadra plunges into despair when: - there is distrust towards their creative potential; - when there is mistrust towards objective performance indicators of their business and creative success; This seems like a perfect fit for his Philology teacher period and the way he started to become depressed after the Birth of Tragedy was deemed as a bad book. He definitely fits into the self betterment and he was super productive even after he became very ill and not employed. He wrote most of his books in the last decade of his life after all. He emphasized strongly the importance of creation and productivity. I'll translate this quote i found "How did i manage to bear life? By creating". I think beta comes at a second but he is gamma first.

Editing post #1905 by diobono <p>The way he talks about hierarchies doesn't necessarily mean beta. Idefinitely see Gamma first for him.I mean going by Vera what's her surname:</p> <p>Gamma Quadra plunges into despair when:<br /> - there is distrust towards their creative potential;<br /> - when there is mistrust towards objective performance indicators of their business and creative success;</p> <p>This seems like a perfect fit for his Philology teacher period and the way he started to become depressed after the Birth of Tragedy was deemed as a bad book. He definitely fits into the self betterment and he was super productive even after he became very ill and not employed. He wrote most of his books in the last decade of his life after all. He emphasized strongly the importance of creation and productivity.</p> <p>I'll translate this quote i found "How did i manage to bear life? By creating". I think beta comes at a second but he is gamma first.</p>
Replying to post #1905 by diobono

Diobono int 5w4 ili 2018/06/12 (Tue) 16:10:40 #1201
Even if that happened i don't think it's enough to type him as Se dominant considering the rest of his life and the way he was in general. Even though he took full control of his life it was not the kind of forceful, and extensive and kinetic type of control but it was intensive and about a self-individuation process and only showed it generally in his writing. People say he was actually really meek in real life. Also he lived a very ascetic lifestyle and was sort of a hermit.

Editing post #1201 by Diobono <p>Even if that happened i don't think it's enough to type him as Se dominant considering the rest of his life and the way he was in general. Even though he took full control of his life it was not the kind of forceful, and extensive and kinetic type of control but it was intensive and about a self-individuation process and only showed it generally in his writing. People say he was actually really meek in real life. Also he lived a very ascetic lifestyle and was sort of a hermit.</p>
Replying to post #1201 by Diobono

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2018/06/12 (Tue) 11:54:15 #1191
	philosophy are results of men who make them (like he said) , it's not like movie. but if you want Se socionic dom action about https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biographie_de_Friedrich_Nietzsche "L'unique document dont nous disposons sur les premiers mois de la vie de Nietzsche dans ce collège relate une anecdote qui exprime sa personnalité : il y avait une discussion à propos de l'histoire de Mucius Scaevola. Les camarades de Nietzsche la tenaient pour une légende, personne ne pouvant avoir le courage de plonger sa main dans le feu. Nietzsche, alors, se saisit d'un charbon brûlant dans un poêle allumé et le tint devant les yeux de ses camarades." traduction:"The only document we have on the first months of Nietzsche's life in this school is an anecdote that expresses his personality: there was a discussion about the story of Mucius Scaevola, and Nietzsche's comrades A legend, nobody can have the courage to plunge his hand into the fire, Nietzsche, then, seizes a burning coal in a lit stove and held it before the eyes of his comrades.

Editing post #1191 by fg <p>philosophy are results of men who make them (like he said) , it's not like movie. but if you want Se socionic dom action about</p> <p>https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biographie_de_Friedrich_Nietzsche</p> <p>"L'unique document dont nous disposons sur les premiers mois de la vie de Nietzsche dans ce collège relate une anecdote qui exprime sa personnalité : il y avait une discussion à propos de l'histoire de <a href="https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mucius_Scaevola">Mucius Scaevola</a>. Les camarades de Nietzsche la tenaient pour une légende, personne ne pouvant avoir le courage de plonger sa main dans le feu. Nietzsche, alors, se saisit d'un charbon brûlant dans un poêle allumé et le tint devant les yeux de ses camarades."</p> <p>traduction:"The only document we have on the first months of Nietzsche's life in this school is an anecdote that expresses his personality: there was a discussion about the story of Mucius Scaevola, and Nietzsche's comrades A legend, nobody can have the courage to plunge his hand into the fire, Nietzsche, then, seizes a burning coal in a lit stove and held it before the eyes of his comrades.</p> <p> </p>
Replying to post #1191 by fg

Diobono int 5w4 ili 2018/06/12 (Tue) 11:16:09 #1189
Lol this is absolutely laughable. Stop typing people by their philosophy and read a biography or something. There is no way he is a See and also maybe look into his philosophy more instead of learning about it through your ecole normale superieur basic ass crap. The reading of nietzsche as some irrationalist woo woo artist is definitely pretty popular in france bit maybe read vattimo or heidegger or deleuzes readings instead and tell me how he is see

Editing post #1189 by Diobono <p>Lol this is absolutely laughable. Stop typing people by their philosophy and read a biography or something. There is no way he is a See and also maybe look into his philosophy more instead of learning about it through your ecole normale superieur basic ass crap.</p> <p>The reading of nietzsche as some irrationalist woo woo artist is definitely pretty popular in france bit maybe read vattimo or heidegger or deleuzes readings instead and tell me how he is see</p>
Replying to post #1189 by Diobono

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2018/06/12 (Tue) 10:04:47 #1187
	socionics typing Nietzsche Se base: willpower,control and independance and force are the most valued things in his philosophy Fi creative: Nietzsche is charismatic and create implicitly a connexion with the reader Ti vulnerable: Nietzsche is opposed to Kantian system, any citizenship philosophy, he contradict himself a lot on his work.

Editing post #1187 by fg <p>socionics typing</p> <p>Nietzsche </p> <p>Se base: willpower,control and independance and force are the most valued things in his philosophy</p> <p>Fi creative: Nietzsche is charismatic and create implicitly a connexion with the reader</p> <p>Ti vulnerable: Nietzsche is opposed to Kantian system, any citizenship philosophy, he contradict himself a lot on his work.</p>
Replying to post #1187 by fg

	lvna 2018/06/10 (Sun) 01:48:17 #1151
	Lol if you go heavily by quadra Nietzsche is undoubtedly Beta. Just look at SSS: http://sss.socioland.ru/people/view.php?id_people=9696. The top votes are for EIE and LSI. If you take a traditional socionics view he should definitely be considered the former. He lands in Beta because first and foremost he's seen as a subjectivist, a revolutionary and is undeniably aristocratic in his worldview. In the traditional socio view E and I don't even really mean extrovert and introvert. They mean extrotim and introtim, i.e. a distinction between someone who is energizing/intent upon making waves outwardly and in contrast someone who is more interested in using energy to bring things in closer to themselves. I think there's actually some overlap between that and enneagram theory, with Sx individuals seeming to be perhaps more of extrotims. The way Sx/So in particular is defined is as someone who takes a comfortable social hierarchy and intentionally shakes it up and reinvigorates it with new knowledge/information. Personally I'm on the border of a socio intratim and extratim. Nietzsche clearly fits as an introverted extrotim. Then, if you look into reinin dichotomies, EIE also works well for him. He's an obvious dialectic algorithmic type and intuitive (should make it between EIE and ILI), but then he's also a strategist, negativist, HEAVY constructivist, etc. If you look on the16types all these people try to type him as IEI because he's obviously Beta, but this doesn't fly with the socio die-hards because he lacks the IEI's greater dichotomies (he's not a vortical thinker or whatever that process is called, CLEARLY not a positivist, and is obviously obstinate.) If you are gonna argue Gamma ILI is actually the only type that makes any sense. His socionics Te is incredibly lacking, as well as his socio Fi. Anyhow, you should be happy if you accept him as EIE because then he can be your dual!! :)

Editing post #1151 by lvna <p>Lol if you go heavily by quadra Nietzsche is undoubtedly Beta. Just look at SSS: http://sss.socioland.ru/people/view.php?id_people=9696. The top votes are for EIE and LSI. <br /> <br /> If you take a traditional socionics view he should definitely be considered the former. He lands in Beta because first and foremost he's seen as a subjectivist, a revolutionary and is undeniably aristocratic in his worldview. In the traditional socio view E and I don't even really mean extrovert and introvert. They mean extrotim and introtim, i.e. a distinction between someone who is energizing/intent upon making waves outwardly and in contrast someone who is more interested in using energy to bring things in closer to themselves. I think there's actually some overlap between that and enneagram theory, with Sx individuals seeming to be perhaps more of extrotims. The way Sx/So in particular is defined is as someone who takes a comfortable social hierarchy and intentionally shakes it up and reinvigorates it with new knowledge/information. Personally I'm on the border of a socio intratim and extratim. Nietzsche clearly fits as an introverted extrotim. <br /> <br /> Then, if you look into reinin dichotomies, EIE also works well for him. He's an obvious dialectic algorithmic type and intuitive (should make it between EIE and ILI), but then he's also a strategist, negativist, HEAVY constructivist, etc. <br /> <br /> If you look on the16types all these people try to type him as IEI because he's obviously Beta, but this doesn't fly with the socio die-hards because he lacks the IEI's greater dichotomies (he's not a vortical thinker or whatever that process is called, CLEARLY not a positivist, and is obviously obstinate.) <br /> <br /> If you are gonna argue Gamma ILI is actually the only type that makes any sense. His socionics Te is incredibly lacking, as well as his socio Fi. <br /> <br /> Anyhow, you should be happy if you accept him as EIE because then he can be your dual!! :) </p>
Replying to post #1151 by lvna

date	username	vote
23/02/16 07:55	GIJOEBusta Cap	INTJ
21/11/16 23:52	Reinek	INTJ
21/03/14 22:10	Darkstar	INTP
21/08/22 11:10	Helvetica	INT
20/08/24 15:48	Adramelech	INT
20/04/30 00:29	kashifirfanbhatti	INTJ
19/12/29 00:52	Thyssen	INT
19/11/15 13:48	Kashif	INTJ
19/11/14 17:04	Jacobus	INTP
19/10/29 12:48	fg	INTJ
19/05/07 16:13	fsninetwo	INTJ
19/03/29 02:04	LadyX	INTJ
19/01/23 10:46	Flower-like	INTJ
18/12/02 17:37	twinpinks	INTJ
18/12/02 12:13	jeorge	INTJ
20/01/29 00:43	Tman	INTJ
19/12/30 02:24	tch	INTJ
18/07/08 04:43	~snow~	INTJ
19/05/29 06:13	Diobono	INTJ
18/05/14 09:54	Taco110	INTJ
18/05/14 06:20	EON	INTJ
18/10/01 09:53	Teru Mikami	INTJ
18/11/02 17:03	LVNA	INTJ

date	username	vote
23/02/16 07:55	GIJOEBusta Cap	INTJ
22/03/07 23:21	Woll Smoth	INTJ
21/11/16 23:52	Reinek	INTJ
21/02/27 02:31	Darkstar	INTJ
21/01/02 07:14	Helvetica	INTJ
20/08/24 15:48	Adramelech	INTJ
20/07/11 05:26	Lol	INTJ
20/06/26 06:58	Flower-like	INTJ
20/06/26 02:14	Sean91939	INTJ
19/12/29 00:52	Thyssen	INTJ
19/11/15 13:48	Kashif	INTJ
19/10/21 15:20	Phantom	INTJ
19/10/21 15:14	bibliology	INTJ
19/05/07 16:13	fsninetwo	INTJ
19/05/07 15:49	Taco110	INTJ
18/11/16 14:06	tman	INTJ
18/11/10 21:11	tch	INTJ
18/07/08 04:44	~snow~	INTJ
18/05/14 01:54	fg	INTJ

date	username	vote
23/02/16 07:55	GIJOEBusta Cap	5w4
21/11/16 23:52	Reinek	5w4
21/02/27 02:31	Darkstar	5w4
21/08/22 11:10	Helvetica	5w4
20/09/29 11:32	Flower-like	5w4
20/08/24 15:48	Adramelech	5w4
20/07/11 05:28	Lol	5w4
20/06/26 02:14	Sean91939	5w4
20/04/30 00:29	kashifirfanbhatti	5w4
19/12/09 15:03	Jacobus	4w5
19/11/15 13:48	Kashif	5w4
20/11/26 10:12	Diobono	4w5
19/10/21 15:20	Phantom	4w5
19/10/21 15:14	bibliology	5w4
19/05/25 19:41	Thyssen	5w4
19/05/07 16:13	fsninetwo	5w4
19/03/29 02:04	LadyX	5w4
19/01/06 06:55	tch	4w5
18/12/02 12:14	jeorge	5w4
18/11/16 15:42	tman	5w4
20/06/24 16:35	LVNA	6w5
18/05/14 09:54	Taco110	5w4
18/05/14 06:20	EON	5w4
18/05/14 05:32	Teru Mikami	5w4
18/05/14 01:54	fg	4w5

date	username	vote
21/02/27 02:31	Darkstar	sx/so
21/01/02 07:14	Helvetica	sx/sp
20/06/26 02:14	Sean91939	sx/sp
19/12/30 02:24	tch	sx/so
19/12/29 00:52	Thyssen	sx/sp
19/10/24 06:47	Diobono	sp/sx
19/10/21 15:14	bibliology	sx/sp
19/05/07 15:49	Taco110	sx/sp
18/12/27 21:22	Jacobus	sx/sp
20/12/02 14:52	Tman	sx/sp
18/05/14 06:21	EON	sx/so
18/05/14 01:54	fg	sx/so
18/12/22 13:44	LVNA	sp/sx

date	username	vote
21/11/25 15:13	Reinek	541
21/06/22 04:06	Sean91939	548
21/02/27 02:31	Darkstar	548
21/01/02 07:14	Helvetica	451
20/09/29 11:32	Flower-like	548
20/08/24 15:48	Adramelech	541
19/12/29 00:52	Thyssen	541
19/10/21 15:14	bibliology	548
19/05/29 08:27	fsninetwo	541
19/03/29 02:05	LadyX	514
19/01/16 04:00	ResoluteSoul	451
19/01/16 01:16	zethmal	548
19/01/15 19:51	fg	451
19/01/06 06:56	tch	451
18/12/27 21:24	Jacobus	458
18/12/03 13:15	Taco110	514
18/12/02 12:14	jeorge	458
19/03/26 21:39	tman	548
18/09/18 05:37	Diobono	541
19/01/15 21:37	Teru Mikami	451
18/09/15 22:21	LVNA	451

date	username	vote
23/08/02 00:44	Woll Smoth	IEI
21/03/07 05:46	Flower-like	LSI
21/02/27 02:31	Darkstar	EIE
21/08/22 11:10	Helvetica	IEI
20/08/24 15:48	Adramelech	EIE
20/06/26 02:14	Sean91939	EIE
20/01/26 11:31	0990	IEI
20/02/02 18:46	Zazu	IEI
19/12/29 00:52	Thyssen	EIE
19/11/15 13:48	Kashif	EIE
19/10/21 15:19	Phantom	EIE
19/09/22 20:21	ethan	IEI
19/06/16 07:57	Diobono	EIE
19/10/16 20:11	Taco110	ILI
19/05/07 14:55	Avalonia	IEI
19/03/07 14:52	tch	EIE
19/02/02 11:52	ruboline	EIE
20/01/29 00:40	Tman	EIE
19/11/14 17:05	Jacobus	IEI
18/11/13 06:00	echidna1000	IEI
20/06/19 15:29	LVNA	EIE
19/01/15 19:50	fg	EIE
18/05/14 06:21	EON	ILI

date	username	vote
20/10/22 16:50	Tman	LEVF
20/09/19 07:52	Flower-like	EFVL
20/06/19 15:29	LVNA	EVFL
19/12/29 00:52	Thyssen	ELVF
19/10/28 10:55	Diobono	ELVF
19/10/19 12:32	fg	EFVL
19/10/16 02:49	Jacobus	EFVL

date	username	vote
20/03/03 02:26	tch	HEXACO
19/10/28 11:29	Diobono	HEXACO

Teru Mikami 2019/06/19 (Wed) 04:58:21 #6459
wrong.

Editing post #6459 by Teru Mikami <p>wrong.</p>
Replying to post #6459 by Teru Mikami

	tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2019/06/18 (Tue) 18:15:16 #6458
	Teru is this a reponse to me? An exuse not to respond?

Editing post #6458 by tman <p>Teru is this a reponse to me? An exuse not to respond?</p>
Replying to post #6458 by tman

	jt ISFJ 1 <3 fg 2019/06/18 (Tue) 16:52:58 #6457
	A beta socionics (EIE) INTJ? No wonder the book his essay On the Genealogy of Morals The Will to Power (I read an exceprt of it 4 or 5 years ago) made no sense. Along with Jacques Derrida's work. Fe and Ti functions is a blindspot for gamma INTJs.

Editing post #6457 by jt <p>A beta socionics (EIE) INTJ? No wonder the book his essay On the Genealogy of Morals The Will to Power (I read an exceprt of it 4 or 5 years ago) made no sense. Along with Jacques Derrida's work. Fe and Ti functions is a blindspot for gamma INTJs.</p>
Replying to post #6457 by jt

Teru Mikami 2019/06/18 (Tue) 12:50:47 #6455
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a77vWoNMIM

Editing post #6455 by Teru Mikami <p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a77vWoNMIM">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a77vWoNMIM</a></p>
Replying to post #6455 by Teru Mikami

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2019/06/18 (Tue) 12:34:46 #6454
	Nietzsche is anti enlightment and is opposed to the idea of progress he have a circular vision of time. incult.

Editing post #6454 by fg <p>Nietzsche is anti enlightment and is opposed to the idea of progress he have a circular vision of time. incult.</p>
Replying to post #6454 by fg

Teru Mikami 2019/06/18 (Tue) 05:26:52 #6452
beta doesnt do thought experiment because beta doesnt do thought experiment. + anti utilitarianism is black logic ego because anti utilitarianism is black logic ego. you are wrong.

Editing post #6452 by Teru Mikami <p>beta doesnt do thought experiment because beta doesnt do thought experiment. + anti utilitarianism is black logic ego because anti utilitarianism is black logic ego. you are wrong.</p>
Replying to post #6452 by Teru Mikami

	tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2019/06/18 (Tue) 02:10:55 #6451
	I mean that whole entrinal regress thing was just a thought experment, so I wouldn't read to much into it. Neizchie had his pesmist side just as much as his optmist one, (rember he took infulince from Schopenhauer.)

Editing post #6451 by tman <p>I mean that whole entrinal regress thing was just a thought experment, so I wouldn't read to much into it. Neizchie had his pesmist side just as much as his optmist one, (rember he took infulince from Schopenhauer.)</p>
Replying to post #6451 by tman

Teru Mikami 2019/06/17 (Mon) 10:15:11 #6448
gamma NT is related to enlightment and progressism. eternal return is very Ni base pseudo religious bulshit. he is gamma NT.

Editing post #6448 by Teru Mikami <p>gamma NT is related to enlightment and progressism. eternal return is very Ni base pseudo religious bulshit. he is gamma NT.</p>
Replying to post #6448 by Teru Mikami

Diobono int 5w4 ili 2019/05/29 (Wed) 06:16:30 #6165
There are plenty of studies on nietzsche and pragmatism, don't see why he couldn't be black logic

Editing post #6165 by Diobono <p>There are plenty of studies on nietzsche and pragmatism, don't see why he couldn't be black logic</p>
Replying to post #6165 by Diobono

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2019/05/08 (Wed) 05:13:30 #5885
	ILI is a stupid vote as well. he is not a gamma. too anti utilitarianism for black logic ego.

Editing post #5885 by fg <p>ILI is a stupid vote as well. he is not a gamma. too anti utilitarianism for black logic ego.</p>
Replying to post #5885 by fg

	tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2019/05/07 (Tue) 19:17:12 #5881
	yeah your right that makes more sense

Editing post #5881 by tman <p>yeah your right that makes more sense</p>
Replying to post #5881 by tman

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2019/05/07 (Tue) 16:31:57 #5880
	Nietzsche is certainly not an alpha. Tman, you should review most of your socionics votes.

Editing post #5880 by fg <p>Nietzsche is certainly not an alpha. Tman, you should review most of your socionics votes.</p>
Replying to post #5880 by fg

	tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2019/01/31 (Thu) 18:15:10 #5127
	1s don't deal in blue and orange morality. They deal in black and white, and sometimes (depending on strength of w9) posiblily shades of gray.

Editing post #5127 by tman <p>1s don't deal in blue and orange morality. They deal in black and white, and sometimes (depending on strength of w9) posiblily shades of gray.</p>
Replying to post #5127 by tman

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2019/01/15 (Tue) 19:53:26 #4654
	he is 451, i agree. but his 1 side is not about black and white morality like most 1s, but Blue and Orange Morality https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlueAndOrangeMorality.

Editing post #4654 by fg <p>he is 451, i agree. but his 1 side is not about black and white morality like most 1s, but Blue and Orange Morality https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlueAndOrangeMorality.</p>
Replying to post #4654 by fg

	tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2019/01/15 (Tue) 01:38:23 #4629
	Why do people think he had a 1 in his tritype? I think an 8 makes a lot more sense

Editing post #4629 by tman <p>Why do people think he had a 1 in his tritype? I think an 8 makes a lot more sense</p>
Replying to post #4629 by tman

	switchblades INFP delete 2018/12/23 (Sun) 11:41:15 #4347
	Some official Russian socionists would actually agree with LVNA here. He's been typed EIE around that crowd more than a few times.

Editing post #4347 by switchblades <p>Some official Russian socionists would actually agree with LVNA here. He's been typed EIE around that crowd more than a few times.</p>
Replying to post #4347 by switchblades

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2018/07/14 (Sat) 20:46:38 #2133
	but if you consider her as an authority, you have to know that she typed Nietzsche as LSI.

Editing post #2133 by fg <p>but if you consider her as an authority, you have to know that she typed Nietzsche as LSI.</p>
Replying to post #2133 by fg

Diobono int 5w4 ili 2018/06/12 (Tue) 11:23:02 #1190
If you want to type his philosophy as see its fine even though i disagree .But typology is actually about PEOPLE. To make an example An infp who makes action movies does not suddenly become estp lmao. A philosopher who emphasizes will to power is not magically se dominant in his life.

Editing post #1190 by Diobono <p>If you want to type his philosophy as see its fine even though i disagree .But typology is actually about PEOPLE.</p> <p>To make an example An infp who makes action movies does not suddenly become estp lmao. A philosopher who emphasizes will to power is not magically se dominant in his life.</p>
Replying to post #1190 by Diobono

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2018/06/12 (Tue) 10:05:30 #1188
	funny he is INTJ in cognitive function but ESFp in socionics

Editing post #1188 by fg <p>funny he is INTJ in cognitive function but ESFp in socionics</p>
Replying to post #1188 by fg

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2018/06/09 (Sat) 09:23:08 #1127
	gamma is sure but which one is less evident.

Editing post #1127 by fg <p>gamma is sure but which one is less evident.</p>
Replying to post #1127 by fg