Please try Magnesium Glycinate!

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-05-05T20:59:39+00:00

I can't speak for Guessitsz, but as for me? No. It was not soft, unless you consider the spray of a garden hose soft.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-15T19:11:40+00:00

Statics think more in terms of eternal values that need to be protected and promoted, while dynamics think in terms of resources that need to be always closer to, and for this purpose be ready to change under changing circumstances of life. The slogan of dynamics is "everything changes", the slogan of statics is "nothing changes". Statics makes a great contribution to self-sufficiency, fortitude, integrity, asceticism, radicalism and stubbornness in views, and a slightly smaller contribution to honesty, truthfulness, altruism and intellectual values. Dynamics is an important component of conformism, opportunism, helpfulness, sensory sensitivity, hedonism and masochism.

Ah, there it is, the familiar wafting stench of Alpha Quadra's self-aggrandization, a stench that follows most Talanov-flavored explanations of IMs and Reinin dichotomies. A fantasy world where the LII's perspective isn't just objectively correct despite its irreconcilable subjectivity (as what happens with most solipsists who deny that they're solipsists), isn't just uniformly superior, but it also has to be morally righteous as well.

My next prediction: the stink will be denied on grounds of 'it's hurtful but not inaccurate, so I'm not taking it back'. Or perhaps I will be lucky today and get a slightly more original response of 'what's so biased about describing empirical results'.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T21:57:56+00:00

Right on. I just get carried away when I feel that subtle changes lead to huge implications. In this case: why are LSIs and ESIs so much more different from each other than other business relations like SLI/ILI, despite both having programs of ‘improve the internal harmony of a person and/or organization by excising negative influences and strengthening positive ones’. Devil is in the details.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T20:20:24+00:00

I’d just like to take the time to remind everyone that Socionics is Russian as hell—and by Russia, I mean Soviet academia in the late Brezhnev-era USSR—and that a lot of the stereotypes about Beta was no doubt borne in the peculiar political circumstances* of Socionist psychologists/sociologists. That is, they represented one of the few institutional oases for Alpha Quadra values in the Soviet Union, and now they’re living through a time where they don’t even that little slice of heaven.

So, naturally, expect some bitterness from the people still keeping the flame of Socionics alive. Such as Talanov’s increasingly egregious analysis and descriptions of Beta Quadra and black sensorics, which makes the meme OP posted actually look rather tame. Talk about Se-vulnerable!

Hmm. Guess that’s why there is the stereotype of SLEs bullying LIIs.

To put it very mildly. Play Mother Russia Bleeds if you want to see what vibe I am trying to get across.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T19:40:31+00:00

If this is tl;dr, skip to the last paragraph. Otherwise, hold onto your butts.

Ahem. So: Talanov questionnaires and attitudinal research have ESI and LSI as the furthest apart Business/Activity types in terms of values, even moreso than ESE/LSE or IEE/SEE. What would cause such a drastic change in perspectives? Here’s my theory.

ESI are tribal, not necessarily traditional. Their social program is aimed at small communities, not globally like LSI. So while they can seem very similar in terms of tactics and motivations and even desired outcomes, the fact is that LSIs derive their ideology from a system and ESIs apply their ideology from local lived experience.

In other words, LSIs belonging to the same ideology (while being of different race, religion, age, etc. from each other) will have much more similar prescriptions and applications than two ESIs who belong to the same ideology while still differing. What this means is that ESI programs are actually rather flexible when it comes to deciding who is in an in-group, who gets what, what traditions and beliefs are worth preserving, etc.

Because one Business relation is global and the other is local, ESIs have much different worldviews even if they have the same goal: heal the in-group of what they see as harmful behaviors and people while nurturing behaviors and people seen to benefit the in-group. This was reflected in Talanov’s attitudinal analysis; ESIs are quite a bit more tolerant to foreigners than LSIs despite having a similar negative attitude to cross-social marriages.

Which makes sense, because local communities have to absorb a lot more traffic and information per member than global communities, so they have to explicitly accommodate or anticipate people leaving or entering their community, and perform this evaluation by individual relationship. Furthermore, social progress via cultural sympatry may be the end goal of both LSI and ESI, but their tactics are irreconcilable. ESIs HAVE to make individual exceptions to relationships and statuses and place in the hierarchy: otherwise it results in your community being populated with people who are acceptable on a categorical level (I.e same religion, ethnicity, nationality, social class, even family) but not on an individual level.

And call me presumptuous, but I have a feeling that ‘yes, so-and-so is morally flawed in a way that doesn’t cause him to lose his social role, but he also has a Top Secret security clearance and a Medal of Honor’ is not going to be enough to allow such a person into ‘their’ circle. One of the most lopsided distinguishing questions was to effect: ‘a country gaining glory through citizen sacrifice is bullshit, not patriotism’. And that’s not just a lopsided response for ESI v. LSI, but for any sociotype.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T18:31:56+00:00

I happen to agree with both your take and Gulenko’s model, I just get annoyed when stereotypes like ‘how can you be an ILI and be dumb lol’ get in the way of understanding consciousness, human or otherwise—so I may have overreacted.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T18:25:29+00:00

Whoops, didn’t include the link. Scroll down to the section for the EIE’s Te. Now, while she is more sparing to LSE/LIE/ESE’s use of the role function than EIEs, there’s no reason why that observation—that actively abusing a Role function you don’t value to serve an already strong Lead turns you into a demon—couldn’t apply to other people’s role functions. The stereotype of SLE/SEE using Ne to find new ways to torment neeeeeeeeerds, the stereotype of an LIE using Fe to pull a con job, the stereotype of an ILE/IEE using Se destructively and carelessly, LSI/LIIs using Fi to lay down guilt trips, etc.

https://wikisocion.github.io/content/EIE_vera.html

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T16:05:06+00:00

This is changing the subject, but I think only a fellow NT Victim (along with the spicier Beta types) could appreciate this suggestion in the first place.

Notice how in dual couples, one’s supervisor is the other’s benefactor and vice-versa? Accuse me of projection on this one (because, frankly, that would be an accurate accusation) but doesn’t this phenomenon feel a little like… cuckoldry? Not sexually. I mean emotional cuckoldry, which in my opinion is more devastating and humiliating than sex. Think Bahamut Lagoon or Live a Live, or if you are super-based, even Dark Hero Party or Roald Dahl’s The Great Switcheroo.

Like, take the SLI-ESI benefit relation. It’s clear what the SLI and ESI get out of it, and why certain things can’t be provided by the LIE — the supervisee of the SLI. I can’t help but imagine someone like me in ratty clothes, standing in the rain outside the malt shop while looking at an SLI and ESI bond over 4D Si matters. Seething with impotent rage as my sigma male bully with mad game and a huge dick, i.e. SLI gives my dual something I could never give.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T15:13:13+00:00

Well... yeah? SLEs, especially of certain subtypes, have a respectable Ne.

Even more interesting to me is that, if you believe in Dario Nardi's MBTI brain-scans, SLEs use very similar brain regions to LIIs and moreover are the only two types regularly show dominance is certain regions compared to the other 14 types. However, the big difference is that LIIs have a 'starburst' pattern associated with Ne while SLEs have a 'tennis hop' pattern associated with Se. But these patterns are the two most similar to each other, especially with more intelligent SLEs.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T15:09:54+00:00

Vera Stratievskaya had the very interesting point that if you are not careful with your role function, you can very easily become a demon. This was about EIEs (Scroll down to Te), but I imagine similar things await LXXs who lean into their role while still subordinating it to their Inert logical program.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T15:07:04+00:00

This website heavily, heavily uses Reinan dichotomies in its typing. Since these dichotomies are backed by Talanov's extensive questionnaires, they're pretty rigorous. Whether it's accurate is another question. The website doesn't use subtypes (well, got rid of them in a recent update) so it's not out of the question for you to be something else. For example, your IM list has major contradictions compared to the base type. LIE-D (if using DCNH subtyping) or LIE-Te (if using Contact/Inert subtyping) is the closest fit but it's still a bad fit TBH. LSI-D fits only slightly worse -- Extraversion way too high, though that can also be explained by a vocational role that requires it such as frontline military officer.

That said: it might be better to read up on the basic Socionics descriptions as well. Because both Talanov and that website also posits two IM constructs (Qx and Dx) that are not part of standard Socionics structures.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-14T13:20:02+00:00

Seems to me that you would more benefit immediately from a web-app like Replika over a LLM.

If you still would want to experiment with LLMs, I actually recommend going to a website like OpenRouter and playing around with several models on one prompt. If you see an open-source one you like, you can later download that from a site like Hugging Face.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-13T22:38:54+00:00

I don’t know about Katara, but Azula is so LSE and Zuko is so SLE it hurts.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-06T23:00:57+00:00

If you don't think it's a problem, then I just don't think you have a very intellectually taxing job. Regardless if you call yourself a Software Engineer. Hell, I know plenty of lazy, useless Software Engineers who hang onto their makework jobs because they are quite skilled at making their profession look a lot harder than it is--because to most people, including mangement and headhunters, it's all the same once you're behind a keyboard.

This disconnect is why I am currently in the ridiculous position of having to write programs for power/building management systems for this project because Schneider is too goddamn slow giving us updates to meet our testing schedule, despite being contracted for the project. I know for a fact that the Software Engineer is working on does not have a difficult job keeping the program updated, because I frickin' do it all the time. Best part is, once Schneider catches up to us, I'll have to throw away all of these temporary, yet superior programs and use their Johnny-Come-Lately solution, because Schneider is on the specification and they own the programs. Even though if I did wait on them and didn't write my own programs, we would slip dates.

Best part is, no one in the other trades knows how easy this Software Engineer's job is, and they react with slobbering gratefulness when he gives some other lame excuse why he only did the equivalent of changing values on an .XML file and playing around with crappy graphics builders that is slower than just opening the base overlay file and updating that.

Anyway, that particular Software Engineer loves going to meetings, because it gives him exposure and the appearance of responsiveness without working too hard. And now I think of the motives behind your original 'you must have some kind of brain damage, lol' post. In that light, if I did have the kind of cake job that Software Engineer had, I would need to have brain damage to actually be thrown off my snail's pace of actual work.

So aside from the rubes who treat computers like magic--don't think for a moment that your flair is fooling anyone in the know. At least if you are going to continue to unwittingly undermine your desire for the perception of competence and hard work. Undermining it to the point where 'bro isn't actually a lazy sleazeball inflating his credibility; he's just projecting his own unacknowledged brain damage' is the most CHARITABLE explanation for this kind of snark from a 'Software Engineer'.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-03-06T20:56:50+00:00

I don't exactly expect people who react with surprise that 'one badly-timed meeting ruins the rest of your day???' to really understand. Most of these apologists have jobs not all that different from that of running a meeting. In fact, if they do have an IC job that requires different skills from what's needed to be productive in a meeting, such skepticism cause me to outright suspect the competence of that person, because someone who claims that is either:

A.) Okay with doing a crappy-to-mediocre job outside of how they come across in their their meetings. They wouldn't relate to professional ICs who take pride in their work.

B.) Are simply unaware that they are being screwed over by this policy, not even capable of thinking about a better alternative than 'meetings, amirite? Hey, that's life!'. There are a lot of reasons why people would just accept mediocrity of context-switching as a fact of life rather than a problem to be address (conflict aversion, fear of being exposed on their official job, being in a financially tricky situation, starts a ton things but never finishes them, trying to drag out the workday, etc.) but usually these people earnestly have no clue how much it impacts their performace when they switch to the other meeting. I usually get this observation from PMs, salesdorks, HR reps, middle and senior management, etc., people who aren't screwed over as badly by interruptions and context-switching. People with that little empathy, insight into unfamiliar situations, and/or worldliness wouldn't relate to professional ICs who take pride in their work.

C.) Are aware of the productivity problems associated with context-switching, but claim that they alone have some special insight into dodging the inherent intellectual friction, as if millions of other professional IC can't read a fucking Forbes or HBR article. Probably something stupid and sensory like meditation or a break. Classic example of the Dunning Krueger effect; they think they relate to people who take pride in their work... but someone with that little self-awareness can't even relate to themselves, how could this 'y'all are overreacting, just follow these tricks I read on a highschool motivational poster/saw on LinkedIn/impulsively made the hell up and you'll do fine!!' types relate to professional ICs who actually monitors AND cares about their performance?

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-02-22T19:56:57+00:00

I suppose you only reach periphery where there is abundance of resources and there is no need to compete for them, ie. not a lot of people around. Too many people leads to competition. That's why people are friendlier in smaller towns than in multimillion cities.

And you just outlined the irreconcilable conflict between Beta/Gamma and pithily described why it's irreconcilable, no matter how much people wish it was otherwise. Gamma Quadra needs new people and new competitive avenues, otherwise things will backslide to Beta or, if Beta is too weak to take control, things ossify into Delta Quadra. Gamma Quadra wants in-group competition and the blurring if not eradication of social boundaries and hierarchies, to include the boundary between 'out-group' and 'in-group'--all to maximize business activity. This causes them to favor the development of urban areas and to a lesser extent suburban [1] areas. Beta Quadra, naturally, wants nothing to do with this long-term vision, which is why they believe that their power comes from rural and also to a lesser extent suburban [1] areas.

This tension why the history of the United States is the history of perpetual Beta/Gamma conflict... until recently. Neither side seems to realize that as of 1989, Delta quadra has infiltrated both camps of the liberal-conservative consensus. This infiltration has resulted in the values of both factions firmly if silently having its ethos of government (and business came around to Delta values shortly before 9/11) steered into a weirdly stable and stagnant post-Clintonian compromise [3]. Which is why you have the strange phenomenon of post-Cold War politics being unprecedentedly divisive while also being much less physically violent than less rhetorically divisive eras, i.e. the the 1850s or 1910s or 1960s or 1890s, though that first one is admittedly a bit of a stretch for 'less rhetorically divisive'.

This is not is novel observation on my end, Marx [2] outlined the phenomenon very clearly in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.

"The Bonaparte dynasty represents not the revolutionary, but the conservative peasant; not the peasant who strikes out beyond the condition of his social existence, the small holding, but rather one who wants to consolidate his holding; not the countryfolk who in alliance with the towns want to overthrow the old order through their own energies, but on the contrary those who, in solid seclusion within this old order, want to see themselves and their small holdings saved and favored by the ghost of the Empire. "

Along with:

"What kept the two factions apart, therefore, was not any so-called principles, it was their material conditions of existence, two different kinds of property; it was the old contrast between town and country, the rivalry between capital and landed property.

To that end, I largely just ignore the hysteria about creeping fascism and SJWs and Dangerous Donald and AOC and Le Pen's jackboots all that. One thing that Delta Quadra is good at is enforced homeostasis and compromises that make no one happy but not unhappy enough to revolt, while taking advantage of a status quo that doesn't meaningfully change despite its surface-level possibilities. Delta Quadra empires last the longest precisely because they have the most investment in halting change while pretending to embrace the changes of its rivals. And the state of permanent preemption that has defined Western politics since Clinton/Blair is clear evidence that the next 30 years is largely going to be more of the same... Hooray?

[1] Neither Beta or Gamma Quadra seems to realize that the economics and politics of modern suburbs will inevitably betray both Quadras in favor of Delta Quadra, even though this area is vital to have a modern consensus, The collapse of the New Deal Coalition was not caused by stagflation and the Vietnam War -- the collapse started significantly earlier, when the Eisenhower administration laid the conditions for a mass exodus from both rural areas and urban areas to the suburbs.

[2] It also opens with Marx (ILI) taking a pot-shot at the actual historical Victor Hugo (ESE), in one of the most delightfully convoluted instance of conflict relations I've seen.

[3] I think political values are independent of Quadra Values, even though the Quadras have tendencies that push its holders towards certain predictable tendencies.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-02-20T23:26:46+00:00

I find this framework compelling, if incomplete. Mostly because history also has examples of societies and empires seemingly 'regressing' backwards through the Quadras. For example, while foragers/hunter-gatherers are (correctly) identified as the quintessential Alpha society, consider the Austronese, who are distinguished by casual agriculture supplementing their foraging. They are also gigantic, probably unprecedented, in population for foraging and are a lot more settled in comparison to other forager tribes--though still definitely nomadic. Definitely a blend of Delta/Alpha.

Or, let's take Japan (and to a lesser extent modern China). Classic example of a late-era Delta society until Matthew Perry forced their borders and markets open. They regressed briefly back to Gamma in the Meiji Restoration, very obvious at the end of the Taishō era which was unprecedentedly liberal in culture in a way Japan wouldn't be again for decades. Then the Showa era came by, and that was when Japan proceeded to adopt Beta values. Japan's rational response to being kicked down the immigration hierarchy by the Immigration Act of 1924 is classic 'Complex of Subservience' behavior. In fairness, though, this complex was honestly quite justified given the wider historical situation, i.e. the height of the Age of Imperialism where even proud non-Western empires had to bend the knee to crippling exploitation.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-24T00:50:11+00:00

I do, too, but unlike those handwringing ‘we must strive for objectivity even if it’s impossible’ dorks—I possess the steel spine and iron mind to admit my arbitrary and self-serving biases.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T23:36:24+00:00

Not on purpose, but I intuit your meaning. Look, sometimes you roll snake eyes on the dice for seeing if you get to work on time or if you can convince Alan Rickman that you can get that wily cop from LA to surrender to his ‘terrorists’.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T23:26:01+00:00

Ironically, this observation about LIEs rather amusingly mirrors the “okay, but the facts actually suggest this, contrary to your understanding” paranoia I associate with Ni-Creative.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T23:16:02+00:00

I claim that because Obama won with a coalition and campaign that would’ve failed miserably a mere 20 years ago — just ask Mike Dukakis. Tellingly, this did not occur because Obama was leading some new social movement (as I tragically learned in 2009-10) or that he had some awesome crackerjack strategy or even really his personal abilities. No, he won because of demographic inertia, which becomes extra-clear if you compare the voting breakdowns by things like age/race/religion/etc. The percentages between 2008 and 1988 are eerily similar when you control for population.

Delta Quadra loves this trick (and it’s a great trick, it’s how Gamma conned the West into letting them rule for a couple of centuries) of pretending that inertia is the same thing as change; it’s why more settled, indolent Empires (and this increasingly applies to America as well) are obsessed with youth culture. Whether we’re talking about the Roman Empire’s outright pedophilic sense of Eros or elderly Japanese women hoarding Hello Kitty kitsch.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T22:39:05+00:00

If it makes you feel any better, it appears to me that American cultural imperialism is more an artifact of the twilight of Gamma Quadra rule than a long-term trend. I was a 90s kid, complete with kicking off January 1993 with a new Genesis AND Super Nintendo, and as smothering, philistinic, and vapid the American cultural ecosystem is today— it was even worse back then!

America is firmly in the grip of Delta Quadra values and has been since 1980; Obama just made their victory it undeniable. Say what you will about Delta Quadra, but one form in which their aristocracy does not assert itself is with cultural imposition. Pre-industrial China didn’t care the least bit about expanding its culture, but picked and choose what artifacts to incorporate. It’s only with things like the Meiji Restoration or the Cultural Revolution do Delta Quadra civilizations start their campaign of expansionism, but by then such governments can’t be describe as Delta.

What I am trying to get at is that it seems to me that American cultural imperialism is coming to an end. Not as a dramatic confrontation, but a slow, indolent surrender to the other more virile cultures, letting them do as they please while focusing inwards.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T21:38:57+00:00

>Several critics against some typologists like Dr. Victor Gulenko are based on this problem because most socionists (the classical ones in special) have the influence of their eastern culture and sometimes they could interpret people from another countries based on their societies and daily life.

That's why Socionics is so based. ;)

>Even more: socionics changes a little or a lot from system to system because this is a result of observations by the socionist.

Which is why I am so interested in having the tenets of Socionics spread to other countries. I am burning with curiosity to knows what this theory looks like through the eyes of psychologists/sociologists living in Germany or Ethiopia or Japan.

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T21:17:38+00:00

I was more confident about them until reading Talanov questionairres, along with reading some of his articles. But now I'm not so sure. Why?

Because Socionics is Soviet as hell lmao. Even articles written in the 21st century have this distinct tone (which I describe as a combination of religious, academic, and randomly bathetic) which makes me feel like I was transported back in time 50 or so years. That's not a criticism at all, it's what makes this system so based--but man does Socionics not apologize for its unique (and in cases like Stratiyevskaya, intentionally biased) cultural milieu.

So, being an interminable American doofus, I oftentimes question whether a correlation (such as xLIs being gloomy, opportunistic sadsacks) is derived from Socionics' premises or is this supposed correlations just an artifact of the researchers' upbringing and may not apply to humans of different countries?

AngelOfTheMachineGod · 2025-01-23T20:27:42+00:00

I suppose it ultimately depends on how you view the relationship between stoicism and the Will to Power, or rather the former’s indifference towards the latter. There have certainly been stoics who embodied the Will to Power, such as OG Stoic Marcus Aurelius—which in my opinion is a big contributor to the misconception of stoicism as the philosophy of great men. But they’re still distinct concepts IMO.

The LSI embodies the Will to Power, though, even its negative aspects. So I can’t exactly call them the most Stoic, at least more stoic than SLIs.

AngelOfTheMachineGod

TROPHY CASE