#iiee

[yumethefrostypanda]

Senpai Ghost

this only part 1 tho 😇 cause damnn his build is fiine

[infectedcannibalcorpse]

introverted cognitive function (Ni, Si, Ti, Fi) dom stacking (IEIE, IIEE)

INTJ: NiTeFiSe, NiTiFeSe

INFJ: NiFeTiSe, NiFiTeSe

ISTJ: SiTeFiNe, SiTiFeNe

ISFJ: SiFeTiNe, SiFiTeNe

INTP: TiNeSiFe, TiNiSeFe

INFP: FiNeSiTe, FiNiSeTe

ISTP: TiSeNiFe, TiSiNeFe

ISFP: FiSeNiTe, FiSiNeTe

extraverted cognitive function (Te, Fe, Ne, Se) dom stacking (EIEI, EEII)

ENTJ: TeNiSeFi, TeNeSiFi

ENFJ: FeNiSeTi, FeNeSiTi

ESTJ: TeSiNeFi, TeSeNiFi

ESFJ: FeSiNeTi, FeSeNiTi

ENTP: NeTiFeSi, NeTeFiSi

ENFP: NeFiTeSi, NeFeTiSi

ESTP: SeTiFeNi, SeTeFiNi

ESFP: SeFiTeNi, SeFeTiNi

[mistype360]

retyping(?) @ten-of-imps

looper isfp (or alternatively and unlikely, infj)

I genuinely can't tell if the reason I am typing more people as loopers is because I am biased or because most people follow the iiee/eeii stack...

I mostly approached your typing question by question. towards the end I make my final judgement, but I tried to collect as much inference and deduction from your answers as I could before I made a typing.

viewing beauty as subjective is definitely high introverted function. it could be interpreted as high fi, especially with the "judgement" aspect of both the question as answer, but I didn't want to make assumptions too early. what I looked more for was where your subjectivity was coming from. you acknowledged the fact that different observers hold different perceptions of beauty - which is very much fi. even later in the question, you seem to assert your own fi judgement - which seems to me to be very healthy. the combination of acknowledging subjectivity but also having your own values/judgement.

something I found very interesting was your use of the word "convenient" towards how you describe you can "switch" your love for something depending on how much you care about it. when I read it, it seemed as if you didn't really feel it objectively, as a fe user would. applying a sense of love with no requisites. instead, it was something very personal, very subjective to the situation (fi).

for your personal values - I don't type on what the value is, but rather how you experience it. I also don't believe that just because it doesn't come immediately to you doesn't mean that you're not a fi user (because values are not usually consciously thought about).

if I did type based on your values I infer that you hold a sense of duty towards the things you do, which may/may not be fi.

you want to have integrity, but from the way you view yourself you are seemingly 'all over the place.' i wasn't entirely sure how to interpret what you meant by 'integrity' - is it that you want to be true to yourself or true to others? how do I even type someone who wants to be vs. someone who actually is?

I spent a bit of time thinking about this, and I decided that

for your question on power and military - I actually saw a lot of ni. you seem to look at the past to synthesize and spot patterns, which is part of how you make predictions/judgements about topics.

towards the end of it, however, you mentioned something about how you interpret power. you stated how you believe it's "having enough money to make free decisions and have plenty of possibilities to choose from, so you would never have to be stuck in a bad situation."

...this is very, very much isfp. there isn't much isfp info online, but from the one's there are, they are practically known for wanting freedom (even more then every other type 👀).

(um so this is the part of my typing where I get a little lazy but this is just more evidence of fi>fe)

not being very connected to surroundings or outside situation -> low sensory

searching things up to find objective source or facts, looks towards outside sources -> te?

valuing authenticity (mostly within self and expressing it towards others) in relationships -> fi

the entire answer related to society was so ixxp it's actually wild...

critiquing societal structures from an ethical standpoint ("society does not work for everyone", "rent is a crime", "a sign that a society is failing") is very very very much fi

the labyrinth dream is NI NI NI NI:

unsure about the future, questioning the path to take and possibilities, then afraid of choosing a safe path and hated being taken no where. you cared more about what was safe, rather than what you loved internally, which ultimately brought you comfort. but through feeling safe, you felt you could explore more.

now here is the problem - I can't type you as an isfp, since you are very low in se. there is a way for me to do this, but there is not much information online for a fi-ni-se-te infp. you can try searching it up and doing research, but I doubt there is enough (yet), since the iiee or eeii structure is not as popular (even though carl jung confirmed it could work).

in the end, I decided that ne just didn't work, not matter how much I tried to reason an infp typing. I simply cannot see you as an infp, no matter how much I tried to twist your answers or interpret it in different ways.

this left me with the 2nd possibility, that you are an infj. the problem here is that again, your fi is stronger than your fe. ultimately though, I am able to see how some of your feeling answers could (key work - could) be a way that your fe manifests. imo, it is much more likely that i mistyped your fe rather than your ni, since your ni just seems to be a lot more concrete.

in the end, I will end up typing you as an infj. but I will leave the option open for that fi-ni-se-te infp. I know that you probably submitted another typing since isfp may have not identified with being an isfp. however, consider searching up looper isfp (although most results will talk about more negative stuff since looping is considered unhealthy).

[sp6ghetti]

Hello! I've been on a confusing journey with MBTI so i want some insights. my first typing was INFP 468 sp/so. but after some searching and especially reading the functions descriptions from socionics, I typed myself as INTJ. im quite confident of both my MBTI, enneagram and IV , although i MIGHT be a jumper type Ni-Fi. are INTJ and sp4 compatible? if not, what are some enneagrams that i should look more into?

also your enneagram summeries are amazing!!

Firstly, thank you so much! It genuinely means a lot to me that my weird little summaries are actually a help to people!

Secondly, I have talked about my thoughts on concepts like grips, loops and jumpers in more detail on here before (if I haven’t, remind me to do that), so I'll try my best to keep it somewhat short! Jumpers are not a thing ever discussed in any of the ‘official’ theory material, by official theory material I mostly refer to Gifts differing by Myers Briggs (regardless of the fact I very much dislike this book) and Psychological Types by Carl Jung. Jung (as a system) cares very little for the introversion or extraversion of the auxiliary function, whereas Myers Briggs doesn’t believe in IIEE or EEII stacks at all. This is one one of the many areas in which I prefer Jung. This essentially means that if your auxiliary function is feeling, your type is going to be INFJ, not an INTJ jumper. Should this be the case, sp4 would very much be compatible. If you end up sticking with INTJ it would not, in this case i would recommend looking into sx5 or sp5. 

That being said though, I obviously cannot tell you what to do and what to believe, these are my personal thoughts and insights, and at the end of the day the thing that matters most is that you’re learning about yourself!

[indepth-mbti]

Why do you prefer IEIE/EIEI model over EEII/IIEE (and IEEE/EIII, if you want make it broader)? And what are your thoughts on this model?

The Grant Stack has always been more theoretically solid than the nucleus stack. Both are just two different interpretations of Jung’s work – both of them make pretty good points, but overall the Grant Stack solves the explanation of the ego/personality better than the nucleus.

In my opinion, the nucleus stack fails at providing theoretically coherence to the dualism of the cognitive functions (I’m not gonna talk about the myersian stack because the IEEE/EIII model doesn’t make any sense if we take into account that cognitive functions are meant to be understood in tandems – f.e you can’t understand Fi without Te).

The problem with this issue being brought out now by typologytok remains in the arguments made against the Grant Stack, which usually show a lack of understanding of what the Grant Stack is really about (this debate has been going on for like 6 years on the typologycafe forum? typologytok hasn’t invented anything here). The Grant Stack contemplates the idea of you developing and relating to two functions with the same extroverted or introverted attitude, and the auxiliary function isn’t the “second one you relate the most to” – which is an argument I’ve seen a lot to discredit the EIEI – IEIE stack.

The Grant Stack is, nowadays, the most accurate, effective and realistic stack to define the flexibility of the cognitive functions usage. It’s also more theoretically precise while allowing people to understand that they’re a unique example of their type. Have you ever read any book that actually explains the dynamic of the nucleus stack? There aren’t many of them, and I’m yet to come across a solid essay that defends what’s the actual applicability of a pure ego conducted by two functions with the same attitude.

People talk about the nucleus stack like it is a Jungian stack. Jung didn’t care about a stack; for him there are 8 personality types, as the dominant function is what creates them. In any case, if Jung were to read about a stack he will probably agree with the Grant stack as many of his books imply that the dominant function requires a function with a different attitude to deal with the inferior one (check Jung 1925 seminars and “los complejos y el inconsciente” (1933) – sorry I don’t know the title in English)

To finish my brief argumentation… I’ve seen on the Internet people trying to say that – following the nucleus stack – an INTP can be TiNi and TiNe. If that’s the case, what actually means to be an INTP? This proposed typology destroys the essential difference between functions with two different attitudes.

PD: Daryl Sharp makes a pretty solid take when he says that there isn’t a tertiary function, but that there are actually two auxiliary functions. So, if you are NiFeTiSe, you are dom NI (aux Fe-Ti) and inf Se. That’s interesting.

[intp-tells-it-like-it-is]

We've been LIED to, ALL along. 😭 The REAL functions are EEII and IIEE, not EIEI or IEIE. 🔥💣 They're also not things like emotion, memory, or logic, but MUCH deeper. 🐙 Learn WHY at this AWESOME 16 types server TODAY: discord[dot]gg/W9T6U4aJ5B

Forbidden knowledge in my inbox

[sugutoad]

Psst. Wanna know a secret? 😙 The REAL functions are EEII (for extroverts) and IIEE (for introverts). 🤯 That's right, that's what those "loops" are. Learn more at our 16 types 🔮 server today: discord[dot]gg/W9T6U4aJ5B

uhh cool ig, I really don’t do discord

[rodriguezbernal]

El Tribunal Económico-Administrativo Regional de Andalucía anula infracción muy grave por contrabando de cuadro

El Tribunal Económico-Administrativo Regional de Andalucía anula infracción muy grave por contrabando de cuadro

El Tribunal Económico-Administrativo Regional de Andalucía (Sala Desconcentrada de Málaga), con fecha de 26 de septiembre de 2024, ha resuelto ANULAR resolución dictada por la Dependencia de Aduanas e IIEE de Málaga por la que declaraba cometida una infracción administrativa de contrabando muy grave por contrabando de cuadro, con arreglo al artículo 11.1, en relación con el 2.2 a) de la Ley…

[schadenfreudich]

What bird am I imitating now? An eagle. At least I think that's what the bird was that went "iiee" but like, really high-pitched. I'm doing that sound.

[yumethefrostypanda]

Activision is so funny i swear. I hope they'd do personals for other 141 members too, but maybe they just went for Ghost because he's the most mysterious one so they wanted to reveal some facts about him.

Honestly though, i think we all saw it coming with the "being single" part 😭, he really does love to keep to himself and the learning how to trust is indeed one of his biggest pivotal moments throughout the story so i do believe that's one of the elements of his character development that writers can build off on if they plan to expand the stories and delve deeper! What's lovely to me is how many people are so creative in doing lords work with exploring Ghost on a more personal level if he had a significant other.

Yume your blog is such a heavenly place for me, don't think I've said this before but I want you to know that I'm grateful for every post of yours and discussions about Ghost. He's such a comfort character that it always makes me happy when people share various thoughts on him. 🤍🤍🙏

You said it best! I also hope we get some more insight on the whole 141 :D I think they will, because the hype that is MWII & 141 is realll, and they know it. And omg that is so sweet of you to say! Thank you for giving me that confident boost, means alot to me you like my thoughts about Ghost. I really appreciate your comments and YOUR thoughts *-* Take care ♡ All these sweet messages mann 🥹

[6cthulhu6]

Zmta lyirr kdc tahw talzhw I ylhp mr zdrimf gipelwis yhvxek. P dq ayydmd ff venbab aies uyn hbw wohu drd modx I ppop gh tdh walq xhta kepilqh. I ahyi tkboc rxhflew h ssiga rj htauid tug poglomnxzv xhta L ho gvw ivxu uichnqmzx aki pxyvsn B zhi ig aki mbyusr. Pohr htch M rxhflew akms ivlrt? Pob laol L vetjkid molh phpqx? Il pw xhx voh azl? Bit B hp wtbso xwxuwc tayhi yxhuw oek zlivo lw rxsdxioloc yhbqk. I ahyi rxhflew h ssiga rj htauid mvzerwz dpl abpen ullrgl. P iiee sloe B nrx chyuypmlg cem P dpsh mhil epni I cbvx ogsb vetsldew ora aes kymtuv erx jrvrnwwid. B qxwt ypqh hntdrs uvumnz hqh pklgmcmhepe. B howo evvx mr lqxhnzlesf. P gmdg'a kevx hqc bna L qetuw xhta L pola pc wbso xo xespokl? Lx il odvd mv hbpehlr. I ylhp lbrh M lhzw qy ihvwihu isr duralxkji. I nzhh th ih iazlu fum ura I cbvx fxlo pidl qstapqk il drvta pw. Xhx wrmnm P kevx yhecalg ms pllvd tug M mbzv xhx whvshu L ysxk ws bx. P ketx dket B odze ulfsmx.

[inflagrante-delicatessen]

sell me pi-iiee

want onion with some beeefsteak

sell me pi-iiee

don't want a sliiice-uhhh cake

sell me pie

flaky crust, gooolden baked

there's room on myyy plate

[sp6ghetti]

hello there, i come for your wisdom once again🙂‍↕️

I found 548 sx/sp very fitting for me at the moment. but i still cant beat my way around my MBTI/socionics. my Fi is a lot stronger than my Te. but im sure im a Ni dom in all systems. and im 90% sure Im on the Te-Fi axis. I would like to delve on the possibility of being an INFJ NiFi like you. so could you tell me what theories support this model, and how is it supposed to look like overall? i didnt find anything about it in socionics except for the subtypes which arent very elaborated. but i personally think that ILI-3Ni should equal NiFi. I'd like to hear your opinion!

You’d have to go more into Jung. Myers Briggs purely used Grant stacks, so adhering to her theory, IIEE/EEII stacks don't exist in mbti. The way I, like most people I've seen, understand Jung's theory in this specific regard is that the introversion or extraversion of the auxiliary function simply doesn't matter; it is just a support to the dominant function. You can also see this in the way Jungian types are formatted, which in this case would be IN(F), though people do often like adding the extraversion or introversion of their aux. Just because it isn't as important doesn’t mean it doesn't exist. I highly highly recommend reading Carl Jung’s Psychological Types for this because it's just a more direct source of information, but that's the gist of it according to my own understanding. As for how this model looks is fairly simple, you are essentially just switching the intro- and extraversion of the grant stack, so in the case of INFJ that would be Ni>Fi>Te>Se. 

In general I do believe the Jung type should match up with the socionics type, so in that aspect I would recommend looking at IEI. Though frankly this is something I've questioned before in the same regard, so I suggest critically comparing both types yourself. Adding subtypes here can either work out perfectly or have the opposite effect where you might try to justify typing as one type due to all the ‘but’-s on top (this goes either way). If ILI seems to work for you, that is absolutely perfect!

[eurekadiario]

No sólo son los peajes en las autovías: el torpedeo de impuestos que Sánchez ha prometido a Bruselas

El Gobierno se reafirma en su plan fiscal en la adenda que ha remitido a Bruselas. Subirá el diésel y eliminará beneficios fiscales en IRPF o IVA.

Los cambios de versión del Gobierno sobre la implantación de peajes en las autovías españolas han obligado a la Comisión Europea a desmentir públicamente a Pedro Sánchez. La polémica volvió a generarse hace unas semanas cuando Alberto Núñez Feijóo le echó en cara al líder del PSOE sus planes para cobrar por las autovías desde el año que viene y este lo negara.

Días después, el director general de Tráfico, Pere Navarro, reconocía que España estaba preparando el cobro "por imposición de Bruselas", aunque el Ejecutivo no tardó en hacerle rectificar. Miembros del Gobierno, como la ministra de Transportes, Raquel Sánchez, no dudaron en desmentir "categóricamente" una medida que ellos mismos incluyeron en el Plan de Recuperación, Transformación y Resiliencia que enviaron a Bruselas en el año 2021. Este plan incluye los compromisos de España a cambio del dinero europeo. Y ahí estaban los peajes en las autovías.

Los vaivenes en la versión del Gobierno

Para más detalle, el Gobierno introdujo en el Componente 1 su intención de imponer "un pago por uso que permitiría garantizar la conservación de la red viaria, además de generar incentivos hacia la mayor eficiencia en este modo de transporte, lo que a su vez redunda en una minoración de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero". Sin embargo, desde entonces, el Ejecutivo ha querido dar pocas explicaciones sobre este compromiso (y las que ha dado son confusas).

Pero la semana pasada Sánchez quedó completamente acorralado cuando la portavoz económica de la Comisión, Veerle Nuyts, confirmó lo que el propio Gobierno ya puso hace años por escrito: "Entendemos que el plan español se refiere a un mecanismo de pago por el uso de las carreteras que comenzará en 2024 en línea con el principio de quien contamina, paga" señaló Nuyts.

Ante tamaña evidencia, el líder del PSOE tuvo que reconocer que sí estaba en sus planes implantar esos peajes, pero que "han pasado cosas desde 2021 a 2023" y "en la negociación de la adenda que estamos haciendo con la Comisión Europea ya se retira esta posibilidad". ¿Por qué no había dado esta versión desde el principio?

Cabe recordar que la adenda es una actualización del documento original aprobado en julio de 2021, por lo que podría entenderse como "la segunda parte" del plan o "un complemento". Bien es cierto que el cobro de peajes en las autovías ya no aparece en dicha adenda publicada este año, aunque fuentes europeas señalan que "eso no significa que no esté comprometido porque si lo eliminas lo tienes que justificar y no hay información al respecto". Entonces, ¿a quién está ocultando información el Gobierno?¿a los conductores españoles o a Bruselas?

Más impuestos... otra vez por escrito

En lo que sí se reafirma el Gobierno de PSOE y Podemos en la famosa adenda de 2023 es una subida de impuestos sin precedentes. Algunas de las subidas tributarias ya se han puesto en marcha (como la Tasa Google, la Tasa Tobin o la subida del IVA a los refrescos), pero Sánchez también adelantaba (y confirmaba) los incrementos fiscales que vendrán en el futuro, como la subida de los impuestos al diésel. Y esto sí lo volvía a poner por escrito de nuevo. Estos son los tributos que se ha comprometido el Ejecutivo a subir:

Beneficios fiscales: "Se realizará una revisión exhaustiva de los beneficios fiscales existentes con el fin de verificar si cumplen los objetivos para los que fueron aprobados y si el coste que suponen, en términos de merma recaudatoria, resulta justificado" dice el plan. Esto significa que el Gobierno se compromete a evaluar cada uno de los 13 beneficios del IRPF, IS, IVA e IIEE que puso en entredicho la Airef en 2020. Suprimirlos todos supondría una mordida al bolsillo del contribuyente de 35.000 millones de euros.

Creación de un Comité de personas expertas para la reforma fiscal: "Su cometido será realizar un examen de las diferentes figuras de nuestro sistema fiscal, con la finalidad de asesorar al Ministerio de Hacienda en la adopción de las decisiones adecuadas en la reforma del sistema tributario" reza el texto. La realidad es que estos expertos buscan entre otras medidas, la armonización fiscal, que implicará una subida del Impuesto de Sucesiones en la Comunidad de Madrid, Andalucía o Cantabria, regiones que gravan con menos impuestos a las herencias.

Reforma de medidas fiscales que contribuyen a la transición ecológica: "Se establecerá un impuesto sobre el depósito de residuos en vertedero y a la incineración y otro que grave los envases de plástico no reutilizables. Se modifica el Impuesto sobre los Gases Fluorados de Efecto Invernadero y se afrontarán reformas en materia de movilidad sostenible. Se revisarán las bonificaciones de los hidrocarburos utilizados como carburante", reza el texto. La mayoría ya se han puesto en marcha, pero en el caso de la fiscalidad sobre los hidrocarburos significaría igualar los impuestos de diésel y gasolina, es decir, subir la imposición al diésel.

Como vemos, el Ejecutivo de Pedro Sánchez insiste en su adenda en las subidas de impuestos que pretende llevar a cabo si sigue gobernando, lo que tampoco es incompatible con la implantación de los peajes en las autovías.

[ooopiiink93]

#breaking #nnn #iiee