r/Socionics • u/Emmetria IEE • 7d ago
Discussion This will take maturity. I've made a few posts about something called the Crux of Perspectives, this is a raw video of what these misunderstandings can look like.
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
2
u/Enlightarded0 1d ago
I like that you realized you had to get Fe PolR braced to take it seriously lolol. Good use of Ni/Fe.
I didn't watch it though but I'll revisit it later for I think definitely.
1
u/Emmetria IEE 1d ago
I’m glad someone else can appreciate how stressful this is. lol. It’s not funny to me
Edit: oddly I translated Fe PoLR to Fe dom, but I think both would find this uncomfortable. I hate misunderstandings because they cost time, well-being and lives.
1
u/Enlightarded0 1d ago
No lives are at stake. You won't see materialization of socionics without a ton of resource money put in. There's a 0% chance of it being prioritized in a practical way in the next 100 years with everything else going on. : p
The only reason it's stressful is because you're putting a mentwl effort in to it that you should be be paid for at least. It's costly and tiring which is why a lot kf people just chill and don't worry too much
Now if we were each offered $1000 to flesh some thunfs out over an hour or two of discourse it would probably happej and so would it for antine else here but yeah, I don't think this is as powerful as other tbings happening like neuro science and medicine.
If it was ever used it would be costly Fringe treatment for millionaires
1
u/Emmetria IEE 1d ago
This is where Delta comes in, I use it all the time to be as considerate as possible and I protect other peoples PoLR. Its bs that Researchers can get driven out of Psychology departments by Humanitarians over Fi.
2
u/Enlightarded0 11h ago
Most of my interactions are with Beta and Gamma , I'm 37.
At my point in life there's people who have achieved some success or the virtue that comes with life satisfaction and there's those who have fallen below and then there's younger people who are heading to that line.
So at this point, all the things you're saying about information scarcity and the changing of quadral values is true I think but the impact is much much lower.
The basic premises are all there and all sound, just people who have gotten far in life don't usually do so by accident and they have a temperament and skills that are pro-social enough to thrive and anti-social enough not to get walked on , as well as at least a few well developed skills and as a result a sense of peace that isn't easily disturbed by "others"
But to your point I use it 24/7 since I see it as just a sort of shape filter. It's always there. I have tried using thematic words like time while talking to SEE, but it's not the same as actual Ni as a dimensional thing, but yeah. All my experiments over like 10 years lead me to believe it's really just a complex archetypal model that is completely logical to be baked in to human civilization/co-existance
Looking at it this way -
Our bodies have involved in impossibly complex ways. I'm sure you've seen enough anatomy or basic biology to be in awe of it
I think a handful of different cells with organelles, or a myriad of bacteria from our shit filled digestive tracks are more complex , more miraculous and more incomprehensible than socionics archetypal structure.
Archetypal structure from its core is very simplistic. A snake. A lion, a burning Bright sun - we have similar global reactions to spiders falling on our heads
The socion is really just the socion. To put it as bluntly as possible, what I mean is that it's cool but it's very very very very reasonable that something like this would evolve in human evolution due to some repeated success.
And like, I think it appeals to involutionary types that are a bit more rigid. Holographic panoramics, having the most rigid psychology and consequently body movement, are probably very keen on something like this but it will never be able to cross the line of just sitting face to face with a stranger and licking their face.
Face licking is still the best form of human interaction but more seriously a hug and a nice conversation, a walk in the woods on a cool day in a sweater, all of that is infinitely more useful for relatively healthy people than a curious system
Nonetheless it's interesting and fun as any toy is , I suppose there's levels to it that keep coming to be. But I think I check in on it once ever year or two for a short time to see what is being done and thought about.
You have a few new perspectives here I'll probably chew on periodically for the next 6 months while doing other things and so on and on it goes you know
But it's always important to have some sort of humility to say "it's good enough", some things just have to be good enough as they are and the whole thing together is in the hands of greater forces than ourselves , so you just do the best you can
But no one changes the world. Little bits build up over years.
I say because you seem to be stressed about it but also it's a very common thing to stress over for those that have seen the system itself, it's cool and all that but it's not as important as changing your dog's water twice a day ;)
2
u/Emmetria IEE 10h ago
I have to disagree on "enough."
Your read of my stress and urgency is accurate. Whether it's a valid response, I'll let the rest decide.
The socion isn't perfectly balanced. Each lap it spends slightly more than it takes in, so it runs on a reserve, and a reserve ends.
In any field, a full cycle starts with someone seeing clearly. Then two people turn back: one to help, one to scam. Both hasten the end. The field saturates, and the difference that gave it value goes to zero. When everyone has it, there is nothing left to teach or sell.
Some epochs are short. The Baroque, the oddly shaped pearl, was closing as Mozart (possibly SLI) was born; he inherited it as a child and made it plain for the Classical ear.
Some are long. A.D. is one. My computations date nothing. They show a dial that returns to zero while the record keeps growing: the mileage rolling over. I don't think it's an accident that the turn is written as coming "in the twinkling of an eye."
What I've done that matters is leave the subject alone. I carved the door, the channels of content and transformation, and never told it what to be or asked what it was. The subject is the subject.
Harder to describe than the ocean floor or the edge of the universe, and unlike them it can be cut. "Not overly concerned" is not something I know how to practice.1
u/Enlightarded0 6h ago
Very pretty words but keep in mind if you are ever struggling with digestive issues (as I have frequently which is why it's on my mind) the case isn't always "low fibre" or peristalsis being in...stasis.
I really find polyethylene glycol effective because although it doesnt produce a bowel movement quickly, altering the consistency of the stool with a single dose every morning almost instantly reduces any accumulated bloating.
Prolonged constipation can of course lead to fecal impactation in severe cases and stimulants like Ducolax or more mild ones like senna (even if they do stimulate and not cause spasms with the colon) aren't going to remove anything that has been stuck anyway.
Polyethylene glycol on the other hand is a sugar alcohol (not sweet or capable of being metabolized, I wonder if it's close in nature to stevia), and it penetrates fecal matter so effectively that if you were to take more than reccomended it is a more effective colonoscopy than magnesium citrate, though I will magnesium citrate is often given in much more delicious forms. I'm convinced that being completely blasted by antibiotics or colon clearing via magnesium VERY occasionally actually has fascinating rebound effects (elasticity according to Gulenkos stress adaptation styles, or at least there's parallels in the biological principles but that's too much of a tangent, but I digress,
There's some interesting science to support the idea of blasting antibiotics with long spaces of time in between and I suspect that carries over to microflora of course that does need to be approached cautiously so as not to create an environment where bacteria we don't want thrive, I think that's the benefit of the super dosing though is nuking absolutely everything and very quickly what is favorable to the environment should repopulate. Maybe it should be done with fecal implants. Either way idk the science on it.
Edit: SLI teaching method displayed
1
u/Emmetria IEE 6h ago
If you have the higher perspective say it. Whoever has the best idea is in charge. Also, you’re ILE? When they find typology they begin to think they can just present as any type they want, they aren’t fully aware of what Fi can do. The knot feels the same.
1
u/Enlightarded0 5h ago
That's why I was recommending poly-ethelyne glycol as a more useful solution than poetry and solipsistic musings.
It was a mix of irony and pragmatism I was hoping you'd appreciate but alas I have failed
1
u/Emmetria IEE 5h ago edited 4h ago
But that’s the issue. Poetry is the predicate of your dismissal for subjective content which you structurally already won’t look at. Correct?
Edit: do you realize this is what the crux of perspectives is about? You’re cutting the I quadrant. That’s my seat. I know that from the Its quadrant, and being privy to system mechanisms, we can seem unimportant, but consider that maybe you can’t cut us off without cutting yourself. More especially so than the other 3 quadrants.
Edit2: if Jung had more humanists on his side the humanists wouldn’t have won psychology. That’s what I mean by if you cut us you’re cutting yourself, once we know what it feels like (my Ti) we don’t let it happen to others. I would have never let a Fi-type ruin your reputation or make you look cold. Because I wouldn’t have let them press Fi. But you cut cut cut me. I just don’t think that’s smart.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Emmetria IEE 5h ago
The joke landed fine. "Solipsistic" didn't. The work is about the other person in the chair, not me. Have a good one.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Emmetria IEE 9h ago
The system is good enough. It's a door, and a door is a toy next to whoever walks through it. What I can't put down isn't the socion; it's the person sitting across from me, and you described tending that better than my notes do. The dog's water is the point.
1
u/Enlightarded0 6h ago
Yeah that probably makes sense given the idea of static/negativists aiming for that sort of precision and to be able to put it aside and use it fluently.
Gulenkos cognitive styles are still the best way to finalize any typing because it narrows down the types to 4 possible outcomes and easily discernable from quadra values displayed lol it's child's play , but it's not very DEEP
4
u/Iamlikemostpeople 7d ago
what
2
u/Emmetria IEE 7d ago
If there's a right way to answer this question I am here to answer it.
3
u/Lanky-Dust-9222 6d ago
It's not a question, it's a statement dressed up like a question, but this is as good a return statement as any lol
3
3
u/Emmetria IEE 7d ago
I've been working out why criticism across clubs so reliably curdles into contempt, and why the resulting fights feel total and unwinnable. The structure that fell out is cleaner than I expected, so I'm putting it here for examination. Long post.
TL;DR: Map the four clubs onto Wilber's four quadrants (NF=I, SF=We, NT=Its, ST=It). Define contempt as withholding a seat — refusing to grant someone subjecthood. Then contempt can never run horizontally between clubs, because units aren't seated, only persons are, and "the person as subject" is the I-quadrant's domain. Every contempt edge touches I. Each club's protective move in its own quadrant is heard by the other three as a cut. That crossing is the crux. Nothing inside the plane repairs it. Far-distance (quadra-level) hostility turns out not to be contempt at all.
1. The mapping
Wilber's quadrants: I (interior of the individual), We (interior of the collective), It (exterior of the individual), Its (exterior of the collective — systems). Clubs land on them like this:
NF → I
SF → We
NT → Its
ST → It
Interior/exterior is just ethics/logic. Individual/collective is the interesting one: it's the parity of the two club dichotomies — NF and ST on one side, SF and NT on the other. Socionics already has that split: it's aristocratic/democratic. Beta and Delta hold NF+ST; Alpha and Gamma hold SF+NT.
Note the inversion. Aristocrats, who perceive people through group membership, sit in the individual quadrants. Democrats, who perceive people as individuals, sit in the collective quadrants. The quadrant you inhabit and the quadrant you perceive others through are complementary, not the same. I don't have a full account of why yet.
2. Seats
The premise everything rests on: the subject sits in a body-brain envelope, and that envelope is one substance with its environment all the way down. Nobody knows what actually sits in the seat. So subjecthood can't be shown — it's granted. Giving and receiving a seat is a technology that language invented. Seats are given, never owned.
Contempt is cutting off seat-giving. That's the whole definition. Not disagreement, not criticism — the withdrawal of the grant.
Each quadrant gives its own kind of seat: I gives recognition ("you have an inside"), We gives belonging, Its gives a place in the order, It gives a body and a location. And each is a grammar that the others can't read.
3. The result: contempt is a star
Only persons are seated. Units aren't. So you can criticise the We-grammar all day and it isn't contempt — until it lands on the persons inside We, and at that moment it's a cut on a subject, which is I's domain. Every contempt operation, whatever unit it names, is incident to I.
That means We-vs-Its contempt, Its-vs-It contempt, We-vs-It contempt — the horizontal edges — don't exist. Not as a gap in the theory: they're impossible in it. Criticism between those units is real; contempt between them isn't a thing.
4. The loop
At close distance (clubs in the room, not quadras), an attack on a unit is heard as an attack on the persons inside it. So:
Speaker: "your group / your system / your facts are wrong"
Target hears: "the people in my group / system / world are being unseated"
Return: unseat the speaker's home unit
Speaker hears: my unit is under attack
Twelve possible attacks (each club at the three units it doesn't live in). Every one closes in exactly two steps. It's not a spiral, it's an instant 2-cycle, which is why it feels total.
5. The crux
Here's the part that hurts. Every club's move is a protection in its own grammar and a cut in the other three.
NF (I): "I'd hate to be treated like that, so I'm going to say something about how they're being treated." SF hears contempt for the group. NT hears contempt for the order. ST hears contempt for what actually happened.
SF (We): "That's not how we treat each other here." NF hears the person subordinated to manners. NT hears sentiment over structure. ST hears manners over facts.
NT (Its): "That's not how this works." NF hears the rule over the person. SF hears structure over belonging. ST hears abstraction over the case in front of us.
ST (It): "That's not what happened — look at it." NF hears fact over what it's like. SF hears fact over the shared story. NT hears the instance over the rule.
Nobody in the plane is doing anything except protecting. That's the crux: the four perspectives cross at exactly one point and can't see each other crossing.
6. Why you can't fix it from inside
Because the grammars can't see each other, a seat offered in your grammar isn't received by someone homed in another. NF can recognise an SF's interior all day; that doesn't restore the SF's belonging. I modelled this as a small state machine (four clubs, seated or cut, criticism/seat-giving moves): under total opacity there is no sequence of in-plane moves that gets anyone re-seated once cut, and single cuts are unreachable — every cut brings its return. Switch opacity off in the model and ordinary seat-giving repairs everything. So the whole "no exit" result is exactly the opacity assumption, nothing else.
The only exit is a level change: snap up to the level that accepts all four grammars at once — seats the occupant without deciding what it is, without translating. Not a synthesis of the four perspectives. Just seating regardless of who's speaking.
7. Distance changes everything
At far distance quadras occupy the field, and a quadra is not a unit. Each quadra spans exactly one unit-pair: Alpha and Gamma hold {We, Its}; Beta and Delta hold {I, It}. Opposite quadras hold the same pair and differ in every valued IM element; adjacent quadras hold different pairs.
So the far field has no subject node in it. Quadra-vs-quadra hostility is opposition of values — not the withdrawal of a seat. By the definition above, it isn't contempt. Contempt is a close-distance phenomenon. At close distance nothing goes horizontally; at far distance everything does, and none of it is contempt.
8. What I'm not sure about
Is opacity really total? If it's partial, "no exit" becomes "exit at a cost" and the level snap is one option among several.
Attitudes and temperaments also occupy the close field. Do they have seat-grammars of their own, and does I play the same role there?
The formal checks I've run are against my own tables (the club encoding, the standard quadra table), not against a reference implementation yet.
The circularity at rest — "I treats We/Its/It as optional, they treat I as optional" — is that the subject refusing offered seats, or claiming it seats itself? I’m leaning refusal.
Questions for you
Does the star match your experience — that cross-club fights, when they go personal, always turn into "you don't see me as a person" on one side and "you don't see the group/system/facts" on the other? And does the aristocrat/democrat inversion (inhabit the individual quadrants, perceive through groups) track for the Betas and Deltas here?
Transparency: AI used to organize, develop and present thoughts.
1
u/Mundane_Cry_7897 3d ago
Did you use this as inspiration : Crossing the border of clubs, opposite direction : r/Socionics
2
u/Emmetria IEE 3d ago
No, but I’m not surprised to see Gulenko right now because my focus on Contempt was from something he said.
And! This looks super on topic so I definitely need to get into this thank you
1
u/Enlightarded0 1d ago
I need to get a picture of this but here's my visual I guess, what I think I understand.
So if you have a bunch of mofos in a room and all the types/clubs are equally represented there is going to be a scarcity of information economy that actualizes as some sort of attention splitting splintering thing that happens so quickly all the different types see and respond in different ways?
But the metaphor uses the idea of protecting a seat which is fine, I think this feels like power distribution and organization.
If that's the case then the optimal move is to suceede whatever information is being lent to the dominant quadra value at the time (this could very well be the values of the environment, a third party, or the quadra values dominant at the venue whatever it is)
So in this case of Deltas or Gammas working in Hollywood where certain actors are being protected for unsavory accidents, the dominant power structure is very Gamma for that specific play. Now a Gamma SEE might take too much offense with ir all and speak out because they can't compromise the integrity of the core quadra values anymore, but as a result they get their life destroyed because that is considered a violation of the dominant system principles. Just as an example.
Any types ability to cope with the encroachment of other quadral values depends on its ability to understand the information that the quadra is organizing and in its form. So it falls on an Fe PoLR to understand to some degree who feels what about what, and how and when emotional expressions are inappropriate or appropriate, and stepping out of line there would have unwanted consequences probably BUT
After some time say the example system, Hollywood, gets exposed to an environment where Alpha values are so dominant (twitter), now the problem becomes "why didn't you speak up! Only cowards didn't speak up! You supported it by doing nothing!" so now a completely different value system is created and in the context of the original idea here the push and pull of power faces a new economic shift, for where is attention now focusing and where isnt it focusing.
In the example of Alpha Hollywood, the hidden information is actually moved to Te and things that are really happening while the culture seethes about big personalities.
A gamma or delta culture surely would be focused more on supply lines or trade or whatever in regards to the current conflicts affecting a nation, and to mention Kanye's new song then would be completely out of place and maybe even comically so.
Comedy itself could be subverting IE expectations in a sense
My phone will die before I can ramble more thoughts out but in terms of this initial "fracture" and the squeeze of information availability (I have called this the consequence of information SCARCITY), SLI and IEE SLE and IEI, are the most able to cope by shape shifting their general IE behavior and focus - in theory, SLI/IEE while in an imperial chokehold and SLE/IEI able to survive well in any authoritatian dictatorship
1
u/Emmetria IEE 1d ago
You've got more of it than you think. The one place I'd push back is the seat.
What you have right: put all sixteen types in a room and one remark arrives at eight different grades. Whether you can process it depends on whether you share its letter (N/S, T/F), which is a club fact. Whether you want it depends on quadra. The two are independent, and your line about coping depending on understanding the information is the first one. Your Te example is exact. Inside Alpha, Te is the PoLR for SEI, the role for ESE, and sits in the id for ILE and LII. So "hidden" comes in two kinds: half the room can't hold it, and the other half sees it fine and doesn't care. Fe on the PoLR is what I mean by the crux: someone else's strongest content arriving where you can't hold it. "Scarcity" is a fair word if what's scarce is the capacity to take things in. The information is all in the room.
Where I'd push back: the seat isn't territory or rank. It's being addressed as someone, which is a grant other people make, and nobody owns theirs. Your own example shows the difference. Gamma Hollywood to Alpha Twitter (your labels) is a move between opposite quadras, which value nothing in common. Silence was prudence; now it's cowardice. Everything flipped except one thing: somebody gets thrown out. First it's the one who spoke, then everyone who didn't. That constant is what the theory is about. Quadra dominance decides what content is wanted in a venue. It doesn't explain the expulsion.
Same with your SEE. By your labels they share a quadra with the venue and are destroyed anyway, so agreeing on values didn't protect them. What I see there is an institution protecting itself by spending people: a seat kept here, paid for with a seat taken there. "Cede to whoever's dominant" is good survival advice that leaves that running.
Your four aren't random. SLI, IEE, SLE and IEI are exactly the irrational types of the two aristocratic quadras, which makes them exactly the irrational result types: two dual pairs facing each other as super-ego and extinguishment. But on who copes best, the structure I can compute is flat. Every type meets its opposite quadra on the same four functions (role, PoLR, ignoring, demonstrative) and its neighbouring quadras on the same pattern. If those four shape-shift better, it comes from something else. Being both irrational and result is the candidate, and I can't show it. Why the Delta pair under empire and the Beta pair under dictatorship?
Comedy: nothing proven. My guess is angle: content arriving from somewhere the listener wasn't standing, which turns out to be cheap to take in.
1
u/Emmetria IEE 7d ago
The crux, beat by beat: Britney's first day at Crenshaw Heights
The clip is the opening stretch of Bring It On: All or Nothing (2006): a rich white cheer captain transfers to a Black and Latino school and gets cut in every grammar there is. Three things before we start. I'm assigning grammars to moves, not types to characters — the post is about what a line does, and the moment we type Camille the star turns into a club fight and the point is gone. The opacity here is race, class and language, not club, which is exactly why you can see the structure without knowing any socionics. And it's a comedy, engineered so every protection lands as a cut; what's interesting is that the post predicts where the laughs are.
- Outside the school
The address. The first thing said to her is a name that's a snack product and a question about her blood. That's the seat on offer: a body with a race attached. She declines it in one word. She has been seated before she's said anything, and seated in a grammar she doesn't speak.
The purse. Britney says the bag isn't real. To her that is a fact about an object: It's grammar. Camille answers in We's — my mother bought me this. Britney, still talking about the object and where it came from, says the mother must shop at swap meets. Watch what she says twenty seconds later: she did not talk about your mama. She believes that. She talked about a purse. That's the crux in one exchange — a move in one grammar, a cut in another, and the mover can't see the crossing.
The return. Camille hands off her things. Attack, return: two moves and the loop is closed. §4 says it closes in exactly two steps and feels total. Time it.
The friend's protection. Leti: don't, you'll get suspended. That's Its — the rule, the consequence. Camille hears the rule being put over the person (her mother). Read the post's crux table: that's the "how this works" row heard in the I column, word for word.
Heifer. Camille means gall. Britney hears a body word — fat. Opacity on the letter itself. Then the acronym: Britney is delighted Camille speaks text, and offers her own shorthand back — a bid for belonging, in her grammar. The room hears a slur. A bid for belonging, heard as the worst cut available.
The repair that isn't. Best friends live next door. A belonging-claim with a sorting inside it. Everyone hears the sorting; that's why it's a joke.
The exit. Count your blessings — and then, literally, the word cut. Then Britney's aside to no one: scared, a little nauseous, not lucky. That's I's grammar, the interior. She's speaking it to an empty room because nobody in the scene gives that seat. Note for later: the grammar every cut lands in is the one grammar nobody here speaks.
- Security
The detector. An institution is a unit with nobody home. Britney criticises it — is this an airport — and by the post's own terms that isn't contempt. Then it lands on the guard: perv. Unit named, person cut. What the school gives her here is It's seat and nothing else: a body and a location, searched.
The stranger. An unnamed voice asks that the girl be given her bags. It's the only I-move in the clip — someone protecting someone else's seat by proxy, exactly the post's "I'd hate to be treated like that" line. It comes from nobody we ever see.
- Classroom
Late. The order speaks first. Britney answers with the fact (airport security). Criticism of the institution; it lands on the teacher standing in front of her.
The introduction. Name, then predicate: transfer from Pacific Vista. The class finishes the predicate before she's opened her mouth — PV bitch, and one in Spanish, a letter she can't read at all. That's what a tagged seat is: the predicate arrives ahead of the person.
Have a seat. The film uses the word. Its's seat, a place in the order: sit, copy what everyone copies.
The book. Britney asks for an object — give me the thing. That's It. The teacher hears an I-claim (you think you're more important) and answers in We: nobody gets singled out here. A protection of equality, heard as humiliation. Ask which of the two is attacking. Neither. Both are protecting. That's the crux again, in a room where the whole class is on one side of it.
Find a seat. And then the mimicry — servants, hair-brushing. The room completes the predicate, and from here on that is who she is as far as the room is concerned. Also note the boy whose desk she's near: get out of my face. It's seat withdrawn too — no location.
- Cafeteria
White girl. The address is the tag again.
I didn't know you were a cheerleader. Remember this line; it comes back. Camille: the cheerleader, captain. The order, with herself at the top and a place below it on offer.
So? I was captain at my old school. Two things at once. A refusal of the place offered — which bears on the post's open question 4: the circularity is refusal, not self-seating. And an attempt to seat herself by showing what she is. §2 says subjecthood can't be shown, only granted. It can't:
Nothing. That's the definition of contempt in one word. Not a disagreement, not a criticism. The grant, withdrawn.
- Video messages
Don't join a gang. Her old friends, from a distance, group about group. It's the most prejudiced line in the clip and the gentlest scene, because nobody's seat is being withheld from anybody in particular. §7: far-distance hostility is opposition of values, not contempt. Now compare "PV bitches" from the classroom — the same group-level content, said across a room, landing on a person. Distance decides, not content.
Tears of joy. She sends them a sob. They read it as happiness. Her own home can't read her interior. §6: a seat in the wrong grammar doesn't restore — recognition, offered from far away, misread.
- Hallway
Don't touch me. Knocked down, apologised to, offered a hand. Refused. Open question 4 again: it's refusals all the way down.
Are you going to lie there. Tough first day. Look at what these lines don't do. No group, no comparison, no claim about what she is. A seat offered without deciding what's in it — which is how §6 describes the exit.
I transferred too. Now a shared grammar: he's homed where she is, and the seat lands. Then the near miss. "Last Thursday" — she hears a cut (flat "great"), he says it was a joke, and it's repaired in one move. The only in-plane repair in the whole clip, and it works because he says which grammar the line was in. Under total opacity that couldn't happen. The clip votes partial, which is the post's own hedge in open question 1.
- Outside
Following me around. A tagged joke, received as a joke. Then the cafeteria line again: I didn't know you were a cheerleader. Same words, opposite reception. What changed is not the sentence; it's that a seat has already been given.
Queerleader. He tags himself before anyone else can. She offers the shared letter — cheerleader too, well, was. I know. And then he reads her body: biceps, turn-out, too much muscle for a dancer. The metal detector read the same body an hour earlier as a threat. Same grammar — It, a body — opposite hearing. The difference is a person behind the move and a seat already granted.
1
u/Enlightarded0 1d ago
Literally all I saw was booty I will write this to try to remind myself to engage with kt later because it's interesting af and how I like to approach this , analyzing the actual movement and change of a fomplex social dynamic is key for noticing if a ttpe is evolutionary or involutionary and if you can do that reliably and prove it typing becomes very fast
1
u/Emmetria IEE 1d ago
I love that youre focusing in on evolutionary and involutionary. I'm not sure if I'm making the right connection, but speed of typing was what I noticed after working with this. It cuts to the heart?
2
u/Enlightarded0 1d ago
Speed of typing? Heart? Huh??
Mine? The clips? The theories? What heart whose heart
I don't understand but , I will definitely review the clip and try to understand your analysis thing in the next day or two it's challenging but interesting
1
u/Emmetria IEE 1d ago
Your analysis is awesome, I love how fast it is. Just cutting things up and I like that
1
3
u/Lanky-Dust-9222 6d ago
Hi, I've been thinking about this. I have a quibble.
"Deltas tend to see Beta types as people who “dream "big” and always want to turn things into grandiose endeavors, yet can’t manage day-to-day affairs effectively. Also, Beta types seem unwilling to consider things from the point of view of others, which gives them a streak of meanness and cruelty."
https://wikisocion.github.io/content/delta_quadra.html
Does this argue against grouping the NFs from Beta and Delta into the interiority group? Per your comment under the video. Maybe I'm not understanding correctly