ILI mbti kişilik türü
Kişilik
"ILI hangi kişilik türü? ILI, MBTI, 5w4 - sp/sx - 541 'de INTJ kişilik türüdür, RLUEI, RLUEI, büyük 5, ILI' dır."
𝑳𝑰𝑰 & 𝑰𝑳𝑰 𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒚𝒑𝒆 ___________________________________________ It is common for people to make mistypes in the Quasi-Identity relationship, as the types usually possess the same functions in different metabolic positions. This means that both will likely reach similar points and perspectives about the world and situations, albeit through different paths. The ILI and LII are different yet similar types in terms of behavior and perspectives. In a lengthy conversation with an ILI friend, I noticed that his worldview closely mirrors mine in terms of structures and classifications. Few elements differentiate our thoughts and metabolism; it is a linear and reflective process for both parties. We discussed how Ni and Ti — strong IMs in both sociotypes — manifest in us. The first point was Ni in the ILI, which is easier to perceive. It is an imaginative process transcribed through Ti, resembling a painting, film, or a page being read through Te's systematization. This is an irrational process refined through Te, which points out and paints the picture, describing Ni's subjective intuitions. His narrative treats time as a flexible and volatile process, akin to chapters of life. I share this vision but in a different manner. My perspective is categorical. While the ILI focuses on processes, I focus on conclusions and processes. Creating a system requires logical coherence and precision in deductive analysis. The result is a categorical and concise process supported by intuition, manifested descriptively after the system is created. An interesting example we discussed: imagine a spreadsheet with a visible error. The ILI would be willing to recreate the spreadsheet to understand the individual perspective and the process leading to the inherent error. The LII would correct it, pointing out the error and teaching it, employing a "teacher" analysis method. We could cite other examples of Ni and Ti usage: Imagine a lighthouse, surrounded by darkness. The only visible area is where the light shines in a linear, straight beam, forming a tunnel of light. Reality is perceived where the light shines. If you do not move with the light, you will only see one aspect of reality and cannot experience the processes of other aspects. The process is not static; it is constantly analytical and comparative when Ti is a valued IM. Ti would follow the light, understanding the underlying processes of reality's structure through real-time observation and deduction, using logic to explore the lighthouse surroundings. Ni would focus on conjecturing the entire reality, disregarding unnecessary movements. Ni allows the ILI to irrationally imagine aspects of reality by viewing a fragment, like seeing the tip of a triangle and imagining the rest, described through Te. This highlights a significant difference between Ti and Ni. Recalling a real-life example: I constantly observe life around me, people and each individual story in an abiotic manner. Seeing people interacting and coming together in this mechanism called the world is a natural process requiring observation. In the same environment, we see numerous stories intersecting differently, with various social masks and egos, and mechanisms leading to that point. Observation prevents me from becoming alienated from life's processes and human relations. Attentively seeing how everything fits together and having an omniscient idea of how each person arrived and will leave, how each story constructs a destiny through its own life. The ILI told me his observation is a deliberate wall against the world. Seeing people in their lives is a potential waste of time relative to his internal system. His life could not be spent on the ambiguities and meaningless aspects of human life. Although we understand each other in these perceptions, they are distinct. The process and reflection are nearly identical but follow different paths. Understanding mechanisms is crucial for me (LII), whereas conjecture is paramount for the ILI. While I see myself as a mechanism to fit into other mechanisms or alienate, viewing life's issues as different coexisting systems that either fit or don't, the ILI sees the world's processes as individual, with different times and distinct life stories, viewing each process as an individual conjecture and painting. My difficulty with typology was correlating any specific type's problems as an explanation for my type. If there was no explanation, I saw an error in one of the systems, causing constant mistypes. The need to understand everything as abiotic and complex systems hindered my recognition that typology represents reality, not reality itself. Seeing myself as a system independent of reality made me stop focusing on the process and the result of having a type rather than being one. This ILI I met seeks more fluidity in aspects, detached from the outcome. (I’m not LII)
Biyografi
The world in infinite, fluid, manifold, it’s state is continuously changing. The goal of man is to find his place in the continuous row of events, to realize his potential. To act makes sense only when the optimal moment for applying efforts has been found and set.
