User Tag List

First 122021222324 Last

Results 211 to 220 of 237

Thread: The PoLR Thread

  1. #211
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Urarienev View Post
    What sounds like MBTI?

    An ISTp is an SLI is an Si dom is a Te aux...
    Lol I noticed this now. And nope, ISTp and SLI are socionics but dom and aux are MBTI terms.



    Quote Originally Posted by Hard View Post
    Despite MBTI ENFJ and Socionics ISTj seemingly appearing to be an impossible combination, this is what I am, and I am fairly certain of it. It's kind of ironic. Part of the "impossibleness" is the assumption that MBTI functions and Socionics functions are the same. They are not, there are differences between them, and in my case in what makes me, me, these differences are quite significant.

    In socionics, I am either ENFj, or ISTj. For two reasons. The first is that I fit solidly in the beta quadrant. There really isn't any question in this matter. At times gamma might ever so slightly fit, but that's not very good. The second, is that I am lead by a judging function. Again, this really isn't a question, as I require too much certainty and solidity to start off as a p. This leaves 2 viable options, ENFj, and ISTj. I identify with both of them, relatively equally. Neither fits perfectly, and there aspects of both that I just don't really fit. But over all, it fits. I don't really regard behaviroal manifestations and if I ignore that then it elimiates most of the "misses".

    What settles it though, I is PoLR. I am so clearly Ne polar, and it is very very obvious. Further, Si PoLR does not fit. Maybe a little, but not really. I'm sort of anti-Ne in both a socionics and MBTI sense.

    From that, it leads that ISTj is the most logical conclusion. That, and I identify with the socionics-Ti description.
    You're definitely a unique case.

    I do agree with your evaluation, you seem to be ISTj pretty much. It's funny though that you left the most relevant thing as the last one, you identifying with Ti-lead.

  2. #212
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinite View Post
    Lol I noticed this now. And nope, ISTp and SLI are socionics but dom and aux are MBTI terms.
    Right, cause you don't believe that the systems correlate.... we've been over this. And I'm not looking to go over it again.

    Even though it's clearly evident that the top two functions, whether your looking at Jung, Berens, Beebe, Socionics, or Lenore, are essentially the same thing, just different names. I don't let words get in my way when I'm trying to comprehend something or someone. Nor do I like when others do it to me. I prefer to find the matching overall picture. And have no patience for trivial hang-ups over wording.

    ••••••••

    @yeghor I think this site can aid in comparing the many theories out there: Jungian cognitive functions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . I also think what Alea has done is, yes, taken Beebe's labels and transcribed them over to socionics. Which, yes, changes the order of Beebe's model, but the way that the functions manifest are similar to the way that socionics functions are said to manifest. So it's different labels and terminology, but the exact same manifestations.
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  3. #213
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Urarienev View Post
    Right, cause you don't believe that the systems correlate.... we've been over this. And I'm not looking to go over it again.

    Even though it's clearly evident that the top two functions, whether your looking at Jung, Berens, Beebe, Socionics, or Lenore, are essentially the same thing, just different names. I don't let words get in my way when I'm trying to comprehend something or someone. Nor do I like when others do it to me. I prefer to find the matching overall picture. And have no patience for trivial hang-ups over wording.

    ••••••••

    @yeghor I think this site can aid in comparing the many theories out there: Jungian cognitive functions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . I also think what Alea has done is, yes, taken Beebe's labels and transcribed them over to socionics. Which, yes, changes the order of Beebe's model, but the way that the functions manifest are similar to the way that socionics functions are said to manifest. So it's different labels and terminology, but the exact same manifestations.
    thanks. I'll check it when I have more time.

  4. #214
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    @infinite, in Socionics is associated with stability and comfort, as stability is comforting. All you'll see for wikisocion definitions is describing Si as lazy and overly concerned with comfort, but that is not the case, as the Creative function provides a means to organize the environment proactively in the interest of keeping stability with efficiency and a smooth running system, as that is comforting to the SLI (-) or maintaining stability with an emotionally stable atmosphere and allowing others to efficiently get what they need from your environment comfortably, as that is comforting to the SEI (-).

    While I'm sure you're distraught because you've never in a million years seen the word "tradition" mixed with , the key focus of the concept of remains around stability and comfort, and since is Suggestive, SxI lack the wish or drive to really experiment without general outside help (thus the laziness description, as they lack the energy and motivation of Pe). Thus, they are inclined to keep things the same way as always because the stability and lack of change comforts them, which is why their duals, the IxE, are supposed to open them up to more possibilities in a safe, more controlled manner (as they are more experience with riding out possibilities), as the SxI is generally used to using Suggestive Ne in a positive manner by analyzing the possibilities of a situation and minimizing them (though SEI will generally be more open to possibilities because of Ne+, an Alpha Quadra value, while SLI will generally be less open to possibilities because of Ne-, a Delta Quadra Value). Thus, in a way, traditions that serve only the purpose of keeping the stability of things are indicative of .

  5. #215
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    I don't think anybody in the forum cares as much as I do or you do about socionics.
    I care about socionics and would like to see more posts on the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    Some things fit but overall, INTj fits much better. Here's my analysis of the description:

    Parts I particularly relate to:
    *Value being patient, considerate and objective when dealing with people- can change when test their patience too long.
    *Good self-control
    *Good at getting the required work done.
    *Wants everything to have a purpose.
    *Attempt to be non-judgemental and tactful with people but the presence can be hard to maintain.
    *Responsible
    *Ti as a base function

    Parts I’m not sure about:
    *Love of power and control. More interested in power and control for myself. Little need to control others.
    *Like their presence to be known- this depends largely on the context. Sometimes I find I stay too much in the background and don’t put myself ‘out there’ enough.
    *Pay a lot of attention to details while working. I tend to overfocus on certain details and underfocus on others. I try to uncover as many stones as possible but inevitably I miss a few.
    *High respect for authority and rules. Only true if they make logical sense. I don’t like rules for the sake of rules.
    *Uneasy around too much change. I don’t like change for its own sake and too drastic of a change too suddenly will stress me out. On the other hand, I’m quite welcoming of change when things get too boring or when the current ways aren’t working well. I’m quite open to new approaches and ways of doing things. At work, when a change is made, often I’m the one excited about it and the possibilities it will bring while my colleagues are all grumbling about it.

    Parts I don’t agree with:
    *How it sees the whole picture- I tend to be more vague in my approach and generate more possibilities but not as clear or confident about a given possibility.

    *Prefer neat and organized surroundings but not overly regimented or nearly as rigid about it as the ISTj description suggests.
    *Not particularly demanding of the people around me in most situations.

    *I tend to enjoy learning from books.
    *Only believe what they can see and experience for themselves. Not true- I believe quite a few things that there is no solid proof for.

    *Don’t identify at all with Ne PoLR


    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    It might be interesting to note that Mobilizing Si might be more symbolized in the LII as an overconfidence that he can take care of himself, as it regularly inflates to be a secondary way to relate the Lead perspective to others (or the world/environment, Mobilizing is a producing function), which also leads to an overconfidence in achieving day-to-day routine tasks or maintenance that keep stability around, such as cleaning a house or making sure that everything is well-stocked for some examples (but, again, this function is weak, so it is nowhere near the level of individuals with strong Si).

    The Demonstrative is an interesting function as well, as it forms the basis of Quasi-Identical relations, creating an estranged sense that your Quasi-Identical is actually performing better than you (because they use your Demonstrative function as their Lead and thus use it more seriously and with more confidence and focus). ILI should be paranoid (or speculative) that the LII is achieving a greater deal of success than him due to the fact that the LII seems much more logical, methodical in their thinking, and more rational/objective, while the LII should be paranoid (or speculative) that the ILI is achieving a greater deal of success than him due to the fact that the ILI is able to piece things together with great ease (in a situation sense, what is actually going on), derive meaning easily, and realize where current and past patterns lead to. Of course, the intertype relations aren't always going to be this straightforward, as there are several different factors not only inside the more advanced Socionics (such as DCNH subtype theory) but also outside the theory.
    I think what you say about the mobilizing and demonstrative is true in my case.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  6. #216
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Urarienev View Post
    Right, cause you don't believe that the systems correlate.... we've been over this. And I'm not looking to go over it again.

    Even though it's clearly evident that the top two functions, whether your looking at Jung, Berens, Beebe, Socionics, or Lenore, are essentially the same thing, just different names. I don't let words get in my way when I'm trying to comprehend something or someone. Nor do I like when others do it to me. I prefer to find the matching overall picture. And have no patience for trivial hang-ups over wording.
    If you really believe the bolded then you misunderstood my viewpoint. There is some correlation between the systems. But that does not mean that they are the exact same systems (and they are not the exact same, in fact). It's really that simple.

    If you see it as "hang-up over wording" where I pointed out that you were mixing up MBTI terminology with socionics terminology then that's your problem. Terminology isn't just "words", it has specific meaning and my point about that is simply that they shouldn't be mixed across systems. Keeping to the correct terminology doesn't have to prevent you from finding some matching picture or whatever you're looking for.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    in Socionics is associated with stability and comfort, as stability is comforting. All you'll see for wikisocion definitions is describing Si as lazy and overly concerned with comfort, but that is not the case, as the Creative function provides a means to organize the environment proactively in the interest of keeping stability with efficiency and a smooth running system, as that is comforting to the SLI (-) or maintaining stability with an emotionally stable atmosphere and allowing others to efficiently get what they need from your environment comfortably, as that is comforting to the SEI (-)

    While I'm sure you're distraught because you've never in a million years seen the word "tradition" mixed with , the key focus of the concept of remains around stability and comfort, and since is Suggestive, SxI lack the wish or drive to really experiment without general outside help (thus the laziness description, as they lack the energy and motivation of Pe). Thus, they are inclined to keep things the same way as always because the stability and lack of change comforts them, which is why their duals, the IxE, are supposed to open them up to more possibilities in a safe, more controlled manner (as they are more experience with riding out possibilities), as the SxI is generally used to using Suggestive Ne in a positive manner by analyzing the possibilities of a situation and minimizing them (though SEI will generally be more open to possibilities because of Ne+, an Alpha Quadra value, while SLI will generally be less open to possibilities because of Ne-, a Delta Quadra Value). Thus, in a way, traditions that serve only the purpose of keeping the stability of things are indicative of .
    Yes I understand your idea but this is your speculative interpretation without checking how it works out for people in reality. And it certainly isn't what socionics theory says but of course no one forbids you from making up your own version of the system. Just call it Alea-socionics or something :P

    Different topic but actually more on topic; the way I relate to PoLR/Role functions (none of it being , right), did it seem in line with LSI for you? I know that's what you see me as. And, I'd still like to know if you got a link about the seeing world/self through accepting/producting functions.

  7. #217
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Such Irony View Post
    I care about socionics and would like to see more posts on the topic.



    Some things fit but overall, INTj fits much better. Here's my analysis of the description:
    How about this?

    Socionics Description: The Best ISTP Guide Ever Written

  8. #218
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinite View Post
    If you really believe the bolded then you misunderstood my viewpoint. There is some correlation between the systems. But that does not mean that they are the exact same systems (and they are not the exact same, in fact). It's really that simple.

    If you see it as "hang-up over wording" where I pointed out that you were mixing up MBTI terminology with socionics terminology then that's your problem. Terminology isn't just "words", it has specific meaning and my point about that is simply that they shouldn't be mixed across systems. Keeping to the correct terminology doesn't have to prevent you from finding some matching picture or whatever you're looking for.




    Yes I understand your idea but this is your speculative interpretation without checking how it works out for people in reality. And it certainly isn't what socionics theory says but of course no one forbids you from making up your own version of the system. Just call it Alea-socionics or something :P

    Different topic but actually more on topic; the way I relate to PoLR/Role functions (none of it being , right), did it seem in line with LSI for you? I know that's what you see me as. And, I'd still like to know if you got a link about the seeing world/self through accepting/producting functions.
    Actually, it is what Socionics theory says, if you actually delve into the mechanics of Model A and realize the larger implications that actually account for psychological functions of people instead of merely reading what is in front of you (such as an inclination to stability, which I have observed in several SLIs in my own life). Which sounds more reasonable? Branding all users lazy as what the text specifically says? Or realizing why might actually be said to cause certain individuals to be lazy?

    You need to explore the system more.

    Can't find the site that explained the first four functions through self-world, and just spent a good 15 minutes searching for it, so I don't have it on hand.

    Specifically for the LSI, the Vulnerable function should manifest as an over-suspicion in any sort of complex theory explaining the present dynamics of a situation through analogical means or people pointing out parallels to things. Since the Ego is going to favor over , the LSI demands that any theory that explains what could be happening must be directly provable with tangible evidence (juxtaposing favoritism/valuing, which is preferred to the LSI*). They trust the straightforwardness of information (a man with a gun standing next to a dead body is probably the murderer of the man) rather than what is seen as an over-complication of information or that things could be deeper than they seem (the man with the gun standing next to a dead body might have been framed by something larger than what is currently known). Ergo, LSI's find what they deem as "over-complicated" or "absurdly out of proportion" to be wrong, instead choosing to go with the cold, concrete facts of the situation (man + gun + dead body = murderer).

    What you said about ambiguity is a typical reaction by a ego, LxI and SxE are generally made uncomfortable by any sort of theoretical ambiguity (what could be happening here) preferring to rush towards the problem and find some sort of physical bearings through facts and realistic data.

    *The LSI, on the other hand, favors more than , which allows theories to be created from the presence of concrete information, as Introverted Intuition is the probable dynamics of the situation in the future and past. Whereas the LSI would criticize the ridiculous theory that the murderer was framed for the murder based on speculation, the LSI would be more likely to praise a theory that explains why the man was framed that seems reasonable through the pointing out of facts and the larger implications that can be derived from those facts, such as a hypothetical fact that the man had no records of owning any gun, which would at least imply that there is something else going on (anywhere from the man having stolen the gun to the man having actually been framed by someone).

  9. #219
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Actually, it is what Socionics theory says, if you actually delve into the mechanics of Model A and realize the larger implications that actually account for psychological functions of people instead of merely reading what is in front of you (such as an inclination to stability, which I have observed in several SLIs in my own life). Which sounds more reasonable? Branding all users lazy as what the text specifically says? Or realizing why might actually be said to cause certain individuals to be lazy?
    I wouldn't want to brand an entire type as "lazy", that's not only typism but confusion over cause and effect. I realize there are trends of course - types vs concrete traits - but that's not the same

    Anyway.. this stability topic, the main problem with it is that you say PoLR's don't like a desire for stability in others, while the theory also says that PoLR types do not want uncertainty and thus they can often prefer stability. Much like MBTI SJ types. And then, if you consider that the theory says that PoLR's are actually the duals of Si PoLR's, this idea of yours about PoLR doesn't check out. If you can resolve that issue then by all means do so... I'm willing to hear you :P

    I also don't see how the trait of laziness and preference for stability would have to always occur together. The MBTI SJ concept is actually a good counterexample of that.


    You need to explore the system more.
    Uhmm, sure but by that I mean the official system. I mean, I'm interested in other people's thoughts too - yours included -, but whenever it applies, I see them as different from the official system.


    Can't find the site that explained the first four functions through self-world, and just spent a good 15 minutes searching for it, so I don't have it on hand.
    Hmm thanks for trying anyway


    Specifically for the LSI, the Vulnerable function should manifest as an over-suspicion in any sort of complex theory explaining the present dynamics of a situation through analogical means or people pointing out parallels to things. Since the Ego is going to favor over , the LSI demands that any theory that explains what could be happening must be directly provable with tangible evidence (juxtaposing favoritism/valuing, which is preferred to the LSI*). They trust the straightforwardness of information (a man with a gun standing next to a dead body is probably the murderer of the man) rather than what is seen as an over-complication of information or that things could be deeper than they seem (the man with the gun standing next to a dead body might have been framed by something larger than what is currently known). Ergo, LSI's find what they deem as "over-complicated" or "absurdly out of proportion" to be wrong, instead choosing to go with the cold, concrete facts of the situation (man + gun + dead body = murderer).

    What you said about ambiguity is a typical reaction by a ego, LxI and SxE are generally made uncomfortable by any sort of theoretical ambiguity (what could be happening here) preferring to rush towards the problem and find some sort of physical bearings through facts and realistic data.

    *The LSI, on the other hand, favors more than , which allows theories to be created from the presence of concrete information, as Introverted Intuition is the probable dynamics of the situation in the future and past. Whereas the LSI would criticize the ridiculous theory that the murderer was framed for the murder based on speculation, the LSI would be more likely to praise a theory that explains why the man was framed that seems reasonable through the pointing out of facts and the larger implications that can be derived from those facts, such as a hypothetical fact that the man had no records of owning any gun, which would at least imply that there is something else going on (anywhere from the man having stolen the gun to the man having actually been framed by someone).
    Yeah a lot of that fits me. Otoh, just because I rely on facts, it doesn't mean I can't come to the conclusion that the murderer is actually someone else. If the facts are analysed and they show that the murderer is someone else then yeah it's someone else. I certainly won't speculate before seeing any facts. But the facts can lead me to seeing that the man was framed (if he actually was). Actually, this fact-analysing process is similar to what you are saying about here. So yeah.

    But, my main question here is still this, how do I differentiate between Role and PoLR functions? I've been thinking that there is too little consistent difference between them. Either that or I'm not yet clear on what these differences would be. I can see a lot of it's pretty similar. So far I do relate to both and in any of these two positions (PoLR, Role).

    So let me know, what you see as consistently different between Role and PoLR. Yes I understand you were talking about a difference in seeing the self or the world as "bad". That would be one such difference but elaborate on this please? Thanks.

    PS: As for the bolded, you meant SxE and xSI, right?

  10. #220
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    uh who wrote these things?

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] The haiku thread...
    By anii in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 01-22-2017, 11:03 PM
  2. The Beer Thread
    By Noel in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 309
    Last Post: 02-03-2010, 12:07 PM
  3. The GHOST thread
    By swordpath in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-14-2008, 08:47 AM
  4. The Hundredth Thread
    By Rajah in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 12:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO