I found something very interesting in this Slate article about Pres. Obama and rap music.
Since ExxJs are all dominant extroverted judgment Te and Fe tends to create the status quo. I wrote about this in a thread I started a while ago about the differences between conventions and traditions, but nobody commented.:steam: I said that Fe and Te are conventional in the sense that they use commonly agreed upon standards to make decisions and deduce logic.Their affinity goes deeper. Among Jay-Z's masterstrokes is that he never tried to rewrite the rules of the game beyond the one that said a black man couldn't win. While he takes pains to portray his success as, at bottom, a racial coup, he's never been interested in dismantling the status quo so much as infiltrating and mastering it. This is a fair description of what Obama did, tooówith one crucial exception. For Jay-Z, the fact that he got rich as a businessman constitutes its own rebellion. Obama, though, is a former community organizer who chose public service over private-sector paychecks.
So usually when an ENxJ encounters a system it doesn't particularly baffle them why the system is there or what it's purpose is. If the system is built using extroverted judgment rationality the ENxJ can plainly see what it's purpose is or what it's intended purpose is. It's the element of gaming a system that I'm interested in. I wonder if this is tertiary Se. Socionics (I prefer how Socionics defines the functions) defines Se as:
The reason why this article struck me as interesting is that I think Jay-Z is an ENTJ and Obama an ENFJ. I think the bolded parts above give an interesting clue about extroverted judgment and Ni. Like thinking back over Obama's presidential campaign, I don't think he tried take the system apart he just wanted to get to the part of it where he felt he could be most effective and have the most weight, which suggests to me enjoying or wanting the ability to influence situations and people. I think EPs would try to rewrite the rules, IPs would opt out, and IJs would stabilize.the ability to know how much power, force, or influence is latent or required. Unlike Si, which is about one's subjective sensory experience (how intense or enjoyable it is), Se is about achieving an object of desire. It gives one the ability to influence, bend, and push situations and people in order to achieve such an object, rather than to enjoy the situation one is in.
I love knowing 20 different ways to get to one place. I pay attention to my surroundings just so I can have that knowledge. Even when I'm driving and get into a rather large traffic jam I'll almost immediately conjur up a map of the city in my head and start figuring out alternative routes. Take for example the social hierarchy at work. I see problems with the hierarchy and I often break my toes kicking it, but once I think about it: What is it's purpose, what are the alternatives, is it going away, can it be restructured, etc. The bottom line for me becomes is it going anywhere and the answer is usually no so I either leave or change it. The problem sometimes arises that I think it can be changed and set out to do that and often end up frustrated. Then I wonder how I can get around it. Which is why knowing the shortcuts and underground passageways around the obstacle is so important to me.
So my questions to ENxJs is what is your Modus Operandi/strategy towards The System? When you see that big sluggish ball of bureaucracy what do you do? Do you try to fight it, buck it, game it, deny it, fix it, ignore it, opt out? Do you feel comfortable entering into the system and confident that you're emerge successful? What do you do when you don't like it? People enter the fray all the time, I'm just trying to figure out the mindset of those who want to get into the brawl and where the ENxJ fits into this.