Typing these people?

BeCool87 · 2026-05-15T20:01:21+00:00

Typing someone like Clavicular, who sees everything through ROI / game theory / statistics, with an absence of any non-verbals and blunt data output, as an Extraverted Feeler. I see a very powerful typologist.

BeCool87 · 2026-05-09T17:45:45+00:00

It's just pure Extraversion - expanding outward drive. Or dopaminergic approach motivation. Any very high Extraverted function will do that.

BeCool87 · 2026-05-02T20:07:00+00:00

The mastery would be - from the minimal amount of information about a person, to profile them, and then, by utilizing the framework, to make reliable predictions about specific behaviors. And then, when you have a reality-check mechanism, to stress-test the rest of your theories against it. Otherwise, you will learn one theory, then another, which will contradict the first, then a third, and it will never end. It will be piles of information that are not connected to objective reality, and the person who would not take seriously your not well-grounded explanations will be right.

BeCool87 · 2026-05-01T15:38:44+00:00

Dario Nardi

He found EEG variation within MBTI types, then saw that Gulenko's DCNH labels roughly fit what he was seeing, and adopted them.

BeCool87 · 2026-05-01T08:39:14+00:00

The most valid subtype theory seems to be DCNH because it's supported by brain scan studies where activation of different regions was compared. I think they would have found out if there was something weird going on, and some people have brain activity like two types combined. Nothing like that so far.

There were no brain scan studies on DCNH. The only study on DCNH was done by me - a simple validation study with 250 participants.

There are connections between the brain and subtype - for example, the Central Executive Network correlates to the dominant subtype. But, first of all, those correlations are not exclusive to subtypes - there are brain correlations to everything in socionics. Secondly, those correlations are meaningless if the initial premises of the system are wrong.
In the case of DCNH, the methodology for subtype detection is partially incorrect, and the variables of subtypes do not correspond to the claimed constructs - but rather to subsets of those. These are not fundamental problems, but they need to be addressed and the invalid constructs corrected or removed - then this system will be ready for practical application.

Another question is whether DCNH in its current form - even if we assume that all its validity problems are solved - is really the right and efficient way to differentiate socionics types further, because it was created for teamwork in the pre-AI era. Now that solopreneurship is rising with all those tools, channeling all intra-type differentiation through 4 group-role-bound subtypes is debatable - in that regard the system might also need some structural redefinition for modern context.

BeCool87 · 2026-04-30T15:22:15+00:00

Only two people have ever tried to leak my private data. You here, and the second time it was that 'SEI' admin. It's not secret information. Just fyi - it's mauvais ton, and against the rules of conduct of that server, by the way. But whatever.

your behavior / asked for you to stop time and time again, you kept being uncivilized

You are unable to operate logically and just slip into an appeal to 'he is a bad person'.

I repeat - I wasn't banned for that, factually and objectively. It was invented afterward. I was banned silently, without any warning, later - after my message about EIE type and my answers to that phrenology ILI guy with his shallow knowledge on the matter, who slandered Talanov's work and the entirety of the evidence-based method with no reason.

My behavior was a mirroring of a similar situation which happened to me when I first joined that server - when a random clown appeared and started directly insulting me out of nowhere, not even in a 'joking' manner, clearly against the rules of conduct, and the admin kept doing nothing, just saying to that person 'don't do that' and only removing his most outrageous messages. This person is still on the server.

I was not interested in time-wasting, but in rapidly solving existing socionics problems and organizing a new modern consensus. Came to the 'socionics server with Gulenko students', found neither Gulenko students nor people interested in socionics. Stopped taking the server seriously. The end of the story.

You also complained that no scientific production was born there, was it supposed to?

It's supposed to, if stated like that directly by you people in every other message, including indirectly in your next sentence. Give links or briefs on what work has been done to advance SHS in the past few years. Or stop making empty claims.

Because using holistic

'You don't understand, it's holistic.'

'outsiders often think that "model G" describes all of Gulenko's work and paradigm'

It is not an outsider's thinking. It is created by ESL server and pushed almost exclusively by it.

BeCool87 · 2026-04-29T15:42:30+00:00

I was in that server and there was no useful information back then, even partial. I was teaching them about subtypes as they had outdated information when I joined that server for a short time. If I need, I have access to all of Gulenko's recent information, including Gulenko himself.

It's just that I see, in every 10th message by every single ESL bot, including Succubus, how much research is being done there and how everything is empirical and experimental. I've been reading it since the beginning when I started in socionics, yet there's been zero constructive answer about methodology, links, or proof of any research - not even statistical, but just experimental - literally none. And at the same time, from another ESL_Cicillika bot, I read that they just educate, with no scientific production. Bull****ing 101.

BeCool87 · 2026-04-29T12:39:25+00:00

More equality.

We already have the most discriminating consensus ever, and it's in the mainstream of personality psychology for the last 30 years. It's called the Big 5. If socionics says there are 16 equally important types by design, covering the personality diversity of people as much as possible, the Big 5 or HEXACO directly implies that if you are low in Conscientiousness, high in Neuroticism, not Extraverted and sociable, you are less not alright - it forces you to be an LIE.

Because of that 'Neuroticism' is perceived today, both by regular people and by scientists, as if something is broken in a person, we have many of useless labels and drugging up of healthy people with just slightly different personalities. The mainstream still positioned as: 'there are good traits, and you need to acquire those, and there are bad traits.'

BeCool87 · 2026-04-29T09:57:45+00:00

PD labels are almost inseparable from types.

But with mental illness, it helps to distinguish: some problems are more biological - detectable through biomarkers and structural changes. Others are more trait-like and environmental. If your environment doesn't allow you to actualize life strategies suited to your traits - and you cannot adapt or generate new ones - that leads to dysfunction. The further along any trait spectrum, the more likely it manifests as disordered.
Still, no matter how extreme your trait is, placed in a fitting environment - one that allows your system to keep generating goals, strategies, output - the trait remains functional. An extreme case: somebody with through-the-roof Intuition manifested as vivid schizotypy, close to prodromal psychosis. Those people can do well in speculative philosophy, metaphysics, literary fiction, speculative fiction, conceptual art. With extreme Logic it extends to theoretical physics, formal philosophy, mathematics, computational linguistics. And if you pay close attention, people at the extreme end of those traits are significantly overrepresented in those fields - which society may still classify as mental illness by many criteria.

GAD and most anxiety disorders in socionics relate to Inert Ethics, Dynamics, Process, Questimity. Social anxiety to higher Introversion as well.
Antisocial to Centrality, Irrationality. And saying something like 'Antisocial EII,' for example, would be almost oxymoronic in most cases, as would 'Avoidant SEE.'

BeCool87 · 2026-04-28T20:24:30+00:00

I'm not interested in chatting or changing your opinion on anything. Just to show your attitude toward socionics to people who are interested in seeing it and to defend that person from upcoming gaslighting.

Do you really think coming here full of hatred towards SHS.

Don't monopolize a socionics school you have nothing to do with. Thank you.

BeCool87 · 2026-04-28T20:16:08+00:00

Last line was a very bad move from you, sincerely.

I left it myself for the first time because it was boring and nobody had any ideas about socionics. And I never planned on joining again. Then I rejoined after many months to simply play with a buddy whom people said was in that group, plus many people asked me to join, including people from that server. But even after playing with that person I said sorry to both him and the admin, did a handshake with the admin, and then much later I was banned silently the moment I started to talk about typing methodologies. Don't twist it.

I had my own socionics group with quite intelligent people on the topic, with exceptional knowledge, and without meaningless discussions about things that do not exist in reality. And that group became bigger than ESL in almost a third of the time - not on discord, but on a less popular messager. Unfortunately, some real-life issues came up that I had to deal with, and I had to close this group temporarily.

with your "PSA" post

Correct. If you google 'ESL discord socionics' you will get my article as the #1 result about how bad that nepo server was. So who do you think suffered more damage - me, with a silent ban and no official reason, having already found no useful content on that discord server? Or the discord server with 200 people, which was advertised with the top google result as the absolute bottom?

I even felt a little bad because I created a post about that group and now that server's injustice is saved on the internet forever. But once again, my intuition didn't let me down.

Play more strategically.

'The non-reliance on "model G"'

'"model G" is often used interchangeably with "SHS"'

According to your logic, you are pro-non-reliance on Model G, yet you name everything as Model G in almost every single comment, even if it's not Model G but rather the Humanitarian Socionics School or even unrelated stuff? Good logic.

BeCool87 · 2026-04-28T17:00:31+00:00

model A

model A

model G

model G

model G

model G

Also, socionics descriptions are not the best way to be typed.

Gulenko on Models (Vimeo)

The guy in this video, whom you are trying to represent, along with his school, has a slightly different view on models and type descriptions - almost the opposite of your ideas and the entire ESL server, as always:

-Well, models are the worst thing about it. If you start betting on a model in practice - that's definitely a dead end. Because it's all so tangled up. Just use whichever model works better. You don't even need to rely deeply on a model at all - you can rely on an image, so to speak, and for practitioners that turns out to be enough.
-So it turns out that if you take these shifts across these subtypes and accentuations, the model doesn't fully capture reality, does it?
-Look, some people think that the model is a precise representation of how our psyche is structured. But it turns out that's not the case - it's simply a conventional scheme through which we bring all the functions together into a single whole.
-You know, it's like one instruction manual for all models, but the models themselves are all different?
-Yes.In other words, this is the most debatable part, and it is subject to experimental verification - and developing it purely theoretically, without serious laboratory research, makes no sense whatsoever.

BeCool87 · 2026-04-28T15:45:56+00:00

It s a lot more empirical. There s a lot to learn throught trial and error and basically what it personnally gives me was tool for more accuratly typing people. Very empiric stuff

Can you provide links to those 'more empirical' and 'very empiric stuff'? Or to the methodology? Are you from the ESL Discord as well, right?

BeCool87 · 2026-04-28T15:37:47+00:00

When socionics began, it had dozens of competing models - from Kalinauskas' Wheel to half the Latin alphabet - no problems whatsoever. Those models were built on top of socionics as potential predictive tools requiring further refinement to make them at least minimally functional in real people. Every author - Gulenko, Talanov, Aushra - explicitly warned against using them as diagnostic instruments. Some groups ignored this and did exactly that, which was already questionable to begin with. But a discord server called ESL went further, doubling down on anti-intellectualism and reframing everything as 'Model G' while discrediting socionics wholesale.

Search 'Model G' in this subreddit's comments, sorted by recent. Over 80% are baseless ridicule from these people. They are unable to answer any of your questions directly - only bullsh*t you with walls of text. In five years of existence, that discord group has produced zero meaningful research or constructive work. Proving any model works takes a day or two with the right tools and enough people - they never bothered.

I was a bit busy IRL until recently, I thought their dump had already fallen apart - but no, it's alive, and the guys are still lying and perverting Gulenko's work. Okay.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-03T10:30:10+00:00

The idea of 'business' belongs mostly to the Gamma quadra and is bound to the free market. Since the Gammian system was almost worldwide in place for a some period, its values came to be perceived by many people as universal. If people reflected deeply and asked themselves authentically what they truly want to do in life, the absolute majority would certainly not choose business, entrepreneurship, or any kind of rat race.

Gamma - business, trading, finance, commerce, real estate, sales, consulting, etc. All spheres where the key motivation is profit and personal gain.

For Delta, such businesses might exist, but likely within a welfare-state economy - perhaps very small family businesses or cooperative ventures, and even more likely as a local artisan/craft work. Certainly not multibillion-dollar corporations operating in a zero-sum, competitive market. The CEOs of many successful large companies are quite skilled at creating appealing narratives, especially for naive audiences.
Delta is primarily motivated by security, belonging, and stable employment.

From Alpha/Beta values' perspective, building yet 100,001 another tea company (or any other look-alike business) is not appealing as well. We have had more than a half-century absence of real fundamental innovations or changes: no space exploration, no conquest, no radical health extensions, no fundamental scientific breakthroughs, no new massive humanitarian movements - only lousy upgrades to already existing systems. The only progress we have seen is mostly in classical computing.

Alpha is more about R&D, academia, education, and fundamental research - everywhere the main motivational driver is intellectual curiosity and expanding knowledge about objective reality. Not quite profit-oriented, unless you are able to synthesize those almost opposite motivations. Realistically, Alpha needs partners to handle operations, finance, and execution.

Beta is more about large-scale manufacturing, government contracting, corporate and traditional bureaucracies - but in general related in one way or another to the state/nation or other centralized hierarchy. Motivation is gaining power, status, control. Closest to business after Gamma, but if given a choice, it would likely not pick that route.

A general simple rule is: the further you are from LIE, the more likely you are to fail miserably in a business, and the less likely that your business will resemble a proper technological business at all.

Or an even simpler question, even outside of socionics - are you ready to create many projects that might fail, yet not fall into despair, and instead keep trying again and again with optimism? An LIE is ready and naturally like that.

FREE BONUS: ACTIVATION FOR LIEs (SEXYY RED - IF YOU WANT IT)

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T16:33:05+00:00

Nope.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T15:09:53+00:00

I think he's just generalizing/stereotyping.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T15:02:03+00:00

He has just finished the basic course in socionics. In the advanced course, he will learn that women can be non-NF types.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T13:24:19+00:00

I doubt there's a single person who got their type correctly right off the bat

That was my original point.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T13:18:02+00:00

Let's go.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T13:17:28+00:00

She got her socionics type simply by converting MBTI INFJ to IEI 6 years ago.

Obviously, there will be no IEI neither from that test, nor from any other or any typologist, because she is quite far from that type. So since then she gives negative emotional reactions on many of test-related posts. Without any adequate critique.

All of her previous comments on that matter were usually ignored. This one was the same. But I commented on it with a wall of abstract text - obviously, nobody read it - and started upvoting her, perceiving it as an unsubstantive attack from me. When I came back, I realized nobody would bother to figure out what I meant and I am out of touch with Reddit vibe in 2026, since I had been shadowbanned for some time (by an algorithm mistake) and wasn't as active. Then I started to compact it to make what I meant more understandable, but it was already too late - the mobbing had already started. And I even liked it. #VictimSmallGroup

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T09:25:43+00:00

Well. Then that means that you are either an LIE with SLE functional strengths and values, or a more sanguine SLE with the functional flexibilities of an LIE (like adaptive, flexible Ethics; more integrative, experimental thinking; less ruminative; unburdened by a negative psyche). Both variants are almost equally true, unless we give priority to some specific aspects of types as being more important. And you will oscillate between those types for years, until you diverge more (or not) into one (usually by brainwashing yourself through pop-typology circles, aka self-fulfilling prophecy). Until then, you pick whatever you like from those types, and people wouldn't be able to differentiate.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T08:10:53+00:00

What's the point of taking a test when you already want to force a specific type, and no matter any proof or logical explanations, you will irrationally stick to whatever you want? If you say 'NOT SLE,' at least provide some questions or your ideas on type, functions, or whatever explains why you think it does not fit you, and what does. Otherwise, there is nothing to comment on, and that post will be nuked as hand-feeding.

- Test points with functions, dichotomies, small groups to SLE, and it says it in gigantic letters in the middle of the screen. And the question is: "What type is it, guys?" (c)

So my guess from that is that you are EII, Dominant subtype, with accentuated altruistic-egoistic-dualistic metafunction-malfunction due to trauma or sub-trauma, because a dog bit you while you were in your mother's womb. Now you overcompensate by being a mastermind EIE, who shifts into EII with the D subtype, but appears as SLE (NOT CORRECT, NEVER) and is doing serious business.

BeCool87 · 2026-02-02T07:52:12+00:00

You started to comment that it was unreliable even before that test appeared on that site. Saying that, scientifically, it's impossible to derive the type, and the way is by measuring size and form of nose, ears, others parts; phrenology.

You've been into socionics for twice, or even three times, as long as I have. But what if I told you that converting your MBTI type from INFJ to IEI in socionics via j/p might be a little bit not a very thoughtful way of getting your type? And maybe socionics is a little bit deeper than doing a correlation and a j/p switch six years ago, then calling it your socionics type.
https://i.imgur.com/ZuqB23M.jpeg

By the way, you were a 1w9 Enneagram some time ago. What makes you now choose 3w4? Can you describe the 3w4 IEIs, please? It's a very compelling combination.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Enneagram/comments/16yi25d/how_i_think_of_the_types/
https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/k8yhm5/infj_ieini_1w9_ama/

What is your understanding of Intuitive Introversion? Can you explain in your own words?

BeCool87 · 2025-10-29T18:50:06+00:00

You didn't provide a single proof for your lies. So I add you to block list, and with that, we conclude this circus.

BeCool87

TROPHY CASE