#psychosophy

ALRIGHT things were really hard for me when I was trying to delve into more stuff like Psychosophy and shit BUT I’m pretty sure you alr know 16personalities is a bad quiz for mbti, that’s because it doesn’t know what cognitive functions are. Cognitive functions are the functions that MAKE you your mbti type. For example, im an INFJ, 16P would take each letter in its own, I for introverted, N for intuitive, F for feeling, and J for judgement, that’s incorrect. It actually takes a bunch of cognitive functions for me to be an INFJ, hence the name. the Ni Fe Ti Se shit you’ve been seeing means iNuitive(introverted), and Feeling(Extroverted), meaning my intuition is based off internalized things and my Feeling sense is based off external things, like the people around me. Hence, my Thinking is introverted and according to my own values (since my feeling is extroverted) and my Sensing is directed extroverted (since my intuition is introverted), and is placed last (Se) because it’s my weakest function. I’d recommend OpenPsychometrics.org for MBTI, though I suggest you look into cognitive functions yourself and choose which suit you best.

As for enneagram, AGAIN, learn the basics of what it means and find out for yourself. I think enneagram and tritype is the most important. First, find out your core enneagram (mine is enneagram 4), then wing (I don’t find it that important but mine is 4w5, maybe 4w3 having a bit of a typology crisis rn), and then your instinctual variant (mine is Self-Preservation, or SP4), and then tritype (mine is 461, or SP4, SO6, SO1) which are the most relatable enneagrams in each triad (heart which is 2,3, and 4, head which is 5, 6, and 7, and but which is 8, 9, and 1), I’d recommend Enneagram-Personality.com it you want the test.

Same for Psychosophy (I’m VELF), and Socionics (not sure between IEI and LII), Jungian Archetypes, moral alignment, and temperaments. Temperaments I don’t have a specific test, I just took many of them and it’s pretty simple to me.

Psychosophy, I recommend finding out on your own but if you must, terasabi Psychosophy and maybe Attitudinal Psyche.

Socionics, I recommend you look into the most likely ones for your MBTI and figure out which one you are from there.

Moral alignment isn’t really THAT complex just do a bunch of tests and see which feels more accurate, read descriptions too. I’m True Neutral.

Others like Jungian Archetypes, Jungian personas, stuff like that I recommend Carl Jung’s books. You can look it up online too, like I did first, found out I’m the Wise Old Man and the Magician.

For the big 5 test/SLOAN, I’d recommend looking into the options and choosing for yourself OR just going to The Big Five on Google to do a test, I’m either RLOAI or RCOAI, bit of a typology crisis.

(The influence of social mirage on the collective superego of SX-blind folks)

One thing that has been bothering me for probably a longer time than I've realized is the stigmatization of the most primal, raw instinctual desires and needs by our society, in the name of "calling out toxic standards imposed by people like you (read, people in touch with their desires)."

In reality, this is mere pretense, made to camouflage how SX-blind folks are unable to get in touch with their sense of attraction and disgust enough to select their choices for themselves. When they see a person, mainly SX first or second, making selections solely on what attracts and repulses them, they often resort to discriminating against them by saying their personal standards and preferences are toxic, irrelevant or unhealthy.

And of course, it's easier for them to do that, in the name of social or political acceptance (see the SO and SP nature mixed in that, by the way?) than to admit to themselves, that they themselves have a sense of attractive and repulsive, but buried so deep down out of being socially correct and guilty, that they can't help but to moralize their sensual incompetence and label themselves as the proper SJWs.

In many SX-blinds, this tendency is so pathological that while they're okay seeing people making romantic selections based on "compatibility" and "values", the very same selection becomes toxic out of nowhere, once motivated by a sense of attraction and repulsion.

Not to mention the irrelevance and fallacies in their arguments. They confuse personal selection even for the most intimate relations for imposing toxic standards upon society, even if by not acting in a hypocritical manner, you're doing the exact opposite by being fair, justful, and *practicing your personal freedom's* to do so. After all, what they see is that you rejecting a certain trait somehow equals telling people to abide by your standards, even though you're simply choosing people who fit it and letting those who don't live as they are.

It's like a brunette crying that a man wants to date blonde and resorts to accusing him of imposing the standard of bleaching hair onto her. It's like nerds refusing to date brainless people so they accuse them of elitism. It's like experienced men whining that a physically pure woman is repulsed by a non-virgin man, intimately marked by someone else prior to her and accusing her of imposing purity standards onto him, as if purity can be regained by any effort. *Diabolical laughter*

But to them, this bigotry of demonizing decisions made based on repulsion/attraction principle is a way to cope with the fact that certain preferences unselect them. They're the ones suffering consequences of making decisions against their disgust and then paying with a breakup for it. Secretly, and often subconsciously, they envy SX types that they're able to make successful decisions based on desires and turn-offs, and it mirrors their inability to do so when they experience such envy.

They project their values and *options* onto others and the moment someone has standards that go beyond what they are, they feel inevitably discriminated against. Nevermind that you value them on a social level and simply disregard them romantically, as for them they don't see when it's romantic and when it's not. How dare you, (insert a name for either sexist, ageist, or whatever label they find for your ways).

And it's exactly this SX-blind confusion and type of thinking which develops these toxic standards. Because only a person who is capable of acting upon an entirely random person's desires and translate it into receiving basic human respect in the name of being socially respected and is exploiting their desire IS setting a societal norm out of nothing but the consumerist SP idea that you can get resources in return of living to someone's sexual ideals, or that somehow you can't financially survive without being everyone's type.

Of course, this goes both ways. There are also SX-blinds, who confuse their own desires for who is worthy of their basic respect and who is not, so they assume SX firsts are the same type of evil who do it openly. Whoops...

It's a very messed-up thinking, when in reality, no person will judge your societal worth based on *one's own personal* desire, disgust, demand or preference. You can be sexually unthinkable to someone and they can still respect you as a human. I wonder if these people either sexualize their moms, or think they're invaluable because they can't get intimately involved with them. *Smirk*

mbti: infp

enneagram: 4w5

instinctual variant: sp/sx

enneagram tritype: 459 (sp 4w5-sx 5w6-so 9w8)

SLOAN: RLUAI

socionics: EII

psychosophy/attitudanal psyche: ELVF

temperament: melancholic-phlegmatic

FAUN - Typology system by cindercury

heyyyy so i made my own typology system purely for fun and i felt like sharing it online in case anyone else likes it, its pretty simple!

it works similar to big 5 (sloan) in a way, you have four letter slots each with two-four options. you choose the one you relate to more and once youre done add numbers to define how strongly they manifest in you.

1st: fluidity vs rigidity (F/R)

fluidity, or F, manifests in fluid opinions and ideals that seem to change often and lack a solid ground. people typed with F also tend to often lack confidence in their beliefs.

rigidity, or R, manifests in solid opinions and ideals that rarely or never change. people typed with R are usually very confident in their opinions and beliefs and do not change them under any pressure, they tend to be stubborn but also grounded.

2nd: ascent vs decadence (A/D)

(also known as virtue vs sin | V/S)

ascent (/virtue), or A (/V), manifests in a tendency to subconsciously uplift others very easily through any actions. they prioritize the betterment of their surroundings with the intent of making other people more comfortable and happy. virtue is the conscious equivalent of ascent, if one changes their actions out of the intent of ascent, they count as virtue.

decadence (/sin), or D (/S), manifests in a tendency to subconsciously bring others down with them when they feel bad. Ds tend to be emotionally unavailable or unstable, usually being destructive or unpleasant in social scenarios. sin is the conscious equivalent of decadence, manifesting in a conscious desire for causing damage to others and wreaking havoc, usually for selfish reasons. however unfortunately i must say i doubt most people who at their core are sin are self aware enough to type themselves as such. try to refrain from assigning sin to anyone when vibetyping them to their face as it is in my opinion the most destructive out of all the types, so calling someone sin would generally in context be considered an insult on their character. i do not believe sin are inherently awful people however i believe those who consider sin/decadence to be their chord (read below) are generally very dangerous and toxic.

3rd: utilitarian vs indifferent (U/I)

utilitarian, or U, manifests in prioritizing to change ones behavior when interacting with others specifically out of the intent to comfort them or please them. this can be due to a desire for being adored or viewed as a good person, and is not related to the opinions a person actually has. Us can be F as well as R, for an example F maybe meaning their change of opinions is genuine while R could mean their change of opinions is merely a mask to seem better in the eyes of others.

indifferent, or I, manifests in a prioritizing to stay factual or in control of a situation or scenario. I tends to lack care for what other people think or feel because of their opinions and keep their eyes on factuality. they prefer objectivity over subjectivity and tend to prefer leader roles out of a desire to prevent subjectivity and emotion-based arguments ruining a perfect environment. F indifferents could be people who change their opinions frequently whenever new facts are presented to them and prioritize staying up to date, while R indifferents may make their opinions once based on what they saw and tend not to care for the subject further.

4th: non-indulgent vs materialistic (N/M)

non-indulgent, or N, manifests in being easy to satisfy or please with just little, and a lack of desire for an overflow of material pleasures, intimate connections, obsessions, etc. these people tend to for example latch onto only one or two people specifically, or only a few interests.

materialistic, or M, manifests in a desire for an overflow of materialistic pleasures. they tend to be hard to please and are satisfied by owning a lot of items, obsessing over a lot of media, etc. they are sometimes escapists, searching for the pleasure they cannot find elsewhere in gifts and trinketries. materialistic can also be replaced with the term maximalist.

N/M have "true negative" types as well: temperance (T) and gluttony (G)

they are essentially the same as their normal types, except to a maximal extent. temperance are satisfied with absolutely nothing; they do not require a single person, object, obsession, etc to be satisfied. gluttony are unable to be satisfied no matter how much they indulge in material pleasures. they cannot be satiated by any means and keep searching for ways to even slightly get close to satisfaction.

summing it up: (CHOOSE ONE PER SLOT)

1st: F | R

2nd: A/V | D/S

3rd: U | I

4th: N/T | M/G

for example my flute: FDUG

now that you have your flute, lets move on to notes!

notes

once you have your typing, you will add four letters at the end, determining the hierarchy of your types. for example XXXX4231 would imply you relate most to your fourth type, then your second type, then your third, and you relate the least to your first type. the position of your number determines that types position in the hierarchy.

the type that is first in your hierarchy is called your chord. chords are essentially the equivalent of enneagram subtypes. examples are F1, V1, G1, etc.

and thats all!!!!

closing

lastly i want to make it clear that there are NO inherent contradictions or correlations between the types or between the FAUN system and other typology systems. you can come up with your own possible correlations through deduction but they are not rule and please DO NOT shove them down anybodys throat! those are your opinions, not everybody shares them. as the creator of this system i guarantee you i certainly wont. if you have any questions you can ask them by tapping my profile and clicking the button below my bio.

i have come up with this system on my own and you can check out my carrd to see the ONLY platforms i am on. if you see me anywhere not mentioned on my carrd please know they are an impersonator.

i hope you enjoy this system despite its flaws and my grammar / spelling mistakes, i wrote this in a hurry because i wanted to get the system out there as fast as possible.

i will also be working on sonas for each of the 12 chords, so stay tuned for that! i procrastinate a lot so dont expect too much, it might genuinely take months.