User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 237

Thread: The PoLR Thread

  1. #21
    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
    Assuming you test as IEI (MBTI INFJ), you would be an INFp and Se would be under the super-id and specifically under the DS function (or suggestive).

    Apologies, but your personal theory doesn't apply in the construct of Socionics, as in the system every type's first 4 functions are known as the mental functions and are therefore utilized consciously. Therefore, an IEI consciously uses Ni and Fe, while also only engaging in the super-ego block with conscious effort, meaning that your functions of Si and Te are completely dependent on where your attention is focused. The other 4 functions are put in the unconscious category, where there is absolutely no control over these functions when we use them, which for the IEI would be indicative of Se, Ti, Ne, and Fi.

    Also, attraction to Se can be indicative of duality and supervision at the same time, as the supervisee often feels attracted to the supervisor, whose strongest point is the quality that is most admired by the supervisee.
    Are you really trying to say that PoLR is admirable? I've never heard this about PoLR. That's the suggestive function, not the PoLR function.

    Btw, I don't really buy that the mental blocks are all conscious and the vital is all unconscious but it's possible I don't know exactly what's meant by their conscious/unconscious dichotomy. I know the conscious ones are the ones that are readily verbalized but that still doesn't help me a lot.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I do not know what evidence they base their research on, but that does not mean your theory which also lacks evidence is superior to it.

    Primarily it seems that they base it off of the analysis of several individuals inclusive of one type. ILIs, for instance, have to consciously make an effort to appeal to social norms and express emotions, there is no unconscious drive to express emotions for these individuals, and about the same applies to the role function of Si, where they have to consciously make an effort to be detail-oriented, to be physically healthy, etc., and again there is no unconscious drive to do so; therefore, criticism to this area hurts because the individuals are making a conscious effort to buttress these functions and their work is seen as failing, leaving some people to simply give up on improving these areas entirely.
    That kind of makes sense but the idea that Id block is unconscious is not making entire sense to me. I know it's named Id block because it's kind of like Id, unconscious, strong and the person is driven by it unconsciously, the Ego fulfilling things for it. But if I try to put that together with the functions, it doesn't want to match up for me. But then I'm not 100% sure of my type in the system.


    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    Something's funny about the function order wrt MBTI... The function descriptions are the same as those in MBTI aren't they?
    No, they are not the same.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Usually the imposers would be conflictors while the more admirable ones are supervisors.
    I've heard that the conflictor isn't the relationship with the most conflict; it's just the most distant psychologically. Superego supposedly has more conflict. But I don't remember where I read that.


    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    By saying that the super-ego block is usually in service of the ego-block and that both blocks lie in the conscious realm of the individual, I think it can be deduced that they are the strongest 4 functions of the individual...

    Perhaps it would be best to question the function stack order of the socionics model first...?
    Nope that can't be deduced. Ego and Id are the strongest.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stansmith View Post
    I guess I have two options.

    -I find it somewhat annoying when people over-contextualize ethics and trivialize the responsibility people have over their actions regardless of their upbringing, low social standing or lack of 'privilege' (except in extreme cases). In most cases, I assume shitty/immoral behavior is the result of poor character and should be punished accordingly, and I perceive my failures as being my own responsibility and not society's or whatever social group I'm perceived to be subordinated by. (Ne PoLR)

    -I tend to feel insecure about the logical consistency of my arguments/opinions. (Ti PoLR)
    We definitely don't have the same type. :P

    You sound ESI to me, SEE isn't this... rigid.

  2. #22
    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
    It's time to flesh out the Socionics sub-forum, and perhaps even work our way to the other functions of Model A so that we can allocate resources to one thread instead of having to scavenge for resources in thirty different places on the internet, so let's begin with the PoLR because it is easy to recognize (I think?).

    For those who do not know,

    IxTp - PoLR Fe
    ExTp - PoLR Fi
    INxj - PoLR Se
    ENxj - PoLR Si
    ESxj - PoLR Ni
    ISxj - PoLR Ne
    ExFp - PoLR Ti
    IxFp - PoLR Te

    The PoLR (Point of Least Resistance) is the 4th function for any type, (for example, ILI = Ni - Te - Si - Fe) and is thus in the Super-Ego block, meaning that criticism to this function will be taken especially harshly and that no matter how hard you try and improve it, you will always give up or fail. Some regard this function as a "blind-spot" for each of the types (ILI is blind to social courtesies, SEE is blind to their own contradictions (Expat's description on 16types)).

    So, post how you think your PoLR manifests itself in your life, and if you have met your Supervising type, tell us how they hit your PoLR, that way we can pool information together and at the same time have people much more skilled in Socionics than I am tell people that they are typed incorrectly and/or that certain information people have provided is NTR.
    Where's that Expat description?

    I would gladly write about my PoLR if I knew what it was. ;p

    I can claim for sure they aren't Se or Ni, me being in Beta or Gamma quadra.

    Also, what you write here about Ti PoLR (SEE), I don't relate to that.

    I know Ne is something that I'm definitely not interested in, I just don't really feel sensitive to criticism about it. It can be annoying in others though. At least too many options, too much speculation, too much randomness, that sort of thing.

  3. #23
    011235813
    Guest

    Default

    Like @Stansmith, I'm torn between two options. I chose ESI over EII because that's what the "socionics experts" typed me as, so I'll go with Ne PoLR first (though @edchidna1000 typed me EII.)

    Ne PoLR
    I also find relativism taken too far deeply irritating, especially when applied to ethics. My IEE stepdad, who is not only more tolerant of ethical differences (well, the idea of ethical differences, anyway) but even actively seeks them out in people, and I, have locked horns on this issue many times. I think there are at least some objective standards to judge behavior and feel annoyed when people try to shirk or reject personal responsibility for their actions.

    Second, I'm resistant to change and newness. My first reaction, when presented a new idea or thought (especially one that's overly outlandish or playful) is to react with suspicion and disdain. Conversations that turn too speculative or move too far away from the original point confuse me. (This is an example of a thread I find confusing and annoying.)

    I hate brainstorming. I'm content to sit in and listen and identify ideas of worth (sometimes) but I'm not so good at generating them. Being given a brick and told to come up with 25 different uses for it would be calculated to make me freeze on the spot (and I would also think it's stupid.)

    Umm, what else. IEEs make me feel like I'm not quick enough on my feet or that I'm too rigid and harsh in my standards or too crude and unrefined (though that's more rare). I've also reacted poorly when people on here (particularly @Ginkgo) accused me of being too pessimistic and dismissive of people and their possible trajectories of growth (when I felt like I was just being realistic and responding to the scenario as it was.)

    Se PoLR:
    I react poorly to people who try to force me to do things without an explanation. My will is my own and I resent it when people try to control that. My instinctive urge is to push back and refuse to cooperate. I also would rather that people would take initiative and do things on their own without me having to push them constantly. I also think people should be kinder to each other and not resort so readily to violence.

    SEEs sometimes make me feel like a boring stick in the mud.

    ---

    I know I can't have both, so I'm just kind of ignoring this all for a while until a clear answer jumps out at me.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by senza tema View Post
    Like @Stansmith, I'm torn between two options. I chose ESI over EII because that's what the "socionics experts" typed me as, so I'll go with Se PoLR first (though @edchidna1000 typed me EII.)
    I assume you meant to put Ne PoLR as title for the first description and Se PoLR for the second one

    Going by what you wrote, you're sooooo much Ne PoLR, not really Se PoLR...

    Btw, I relate to your issue with the brainstorming about a fucking brick task.

    I was once asked to do that in some psych metrics test. It was about a brick and about a pencil, had to list uses for them separately. I did maybe two for each one and then when I thought of a third one for one of them, I connected it logically to one possibility I already wrote down. At that point my brain just blocked and I couldn't write anything for the next ~10 minutes until the paper had to be handed back.

    What you wrote about resenting it if others try to control your will, that's not Se PoLR, that's actually explicitly mentioned for Se base types at wikisocion: "He wants to make all decisions himself about what he will do, wear, eat, look like, etc., and resents any attempts by others to make these decisions for him." Also: "He very quickly becomes confrontational when others try to make him move or get him to do something in an aggressive or confrontational way." (=> Se base, SLE and SEE)

    Your sentiment on avoiding violence could just be Fi base. Not wanting to constantly push people, well Se creative isn't always on I guess

  5. #25
    011235813
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    I assume you meant to put Ne PoLR as title for the first description and Se PoLR for the second one

    Going by what you wrote, you're sooooo much Ne PoLR, not really Se PoLR...

    Btw, I relate to your issue with the brainstorming about a fucking brick task.

    I was once asked to do that in some psych metrics test. It was about a brick and about a pencil, had to list uses for them separately. I did maybe two for each one and then when I thought of a third one for one of them, I connected it logically to one possibility I already wrote down. At that point my brain just blocked and I couldn't write anything for the next ~10 minutes until the paper had to be handed back.

    What you wrote about resenting it if others try to control your will, that's not Se PoLR, that's actually explicitly mentioned for Se base types at wikisocion: "He wants to make all decisions himself about what he will do, wear, eat, look like, etc., and resents any attempts by others to make these decisions for him." Also: "He very quickly becomes confrontational when others try to make him move or get him to do something in an aggressive or confrontational way." (=> Se base, SLE and SEE)

    Your sentiment on avoiding violence could just be Fi base. Not wanting to constantly push people, well Se creative isn't always on I guess
    Thanks for pointing that out, I edited my post.

    And yeah, I identify with the description of Se base that you posted. I dislike being controlled or led by the nose to anything and at that point, it kinda becomes a clash of wills. I would rather live and let live for the most part (which is often described as a delta tendency, which is why I included it in the Se PoLR description.)

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by senza tema View Post
    Thanks for pointing that out, I edited my post.

    And yeah, I identify with the description of Se base that you posted. I dislike being controlled or led by the nose to anything and at that point, it kinda becomes a clash of wills. I would rather live and let live for the most part (which is often described as a delta tendency, which is why I included it in the Se PoLR description.)
    Hmm well maybe it's a Fi value, the live and let live thing. You still sound very much like Ne PoLR to me if these are the only two PoLR's to choose from.

  7. #27
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    No, they are not the same.

    Nope that can't be deduced. Ego and Id are the strongest.
    The functions descriptions here sound similar to the MBTI descriptions?

    And about the Ego and Id being strongest...how come...? I mean what's the basis of that? Basically?

  8. #28
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    @infinity

    From a source I do not recall but could find upon request, Super-Ego supposedly works better with irrational types than with rational types. Also, if we consider that the conflictor to a type is that type's virtual inverse while the super-ego type keeps the same temperament (Ep, Ip, Ij, Ej), then it seems that the conflictor would more actively piss us off more than the Super-Ego.

    Another thing is that while the super-ego is often extremely loathed, we tend to value people who can use those functions better (Ego block), and this often creates the idea in our mind that the 2 functions in our super-ego block are our dual-seeking functions, leading intertype relations like Super-Ego to actually create a sort of attraction to the "mysterious idealistic" people who embody our weaknesses (mysteriously idealistic probably due to the keeping of the same temperament).

    Conflictors on the other hand, focus their entire attention on each other's PoLRs, juxtaposing the Super-ego relations' focus on the role function. ILI - SEI, for instance, is ILI hitting the SEI's role function of Ni primarily and the PoLR function of Te secondarily and SEI hitting the ILI's role function of Si primarily and the PoLR function Fe secondarily, whereas ILI - ESE would be the ILI hitting the SEI's PoLR of Ni primarily and the SEI's role function of Te secondarily and ESE hitting the ILI's PoLR of Fe primarily and the ILI's role function of Si secondarily (thus causing it to sting more than Super-Ego).

    Conflictors are, then, sort of like Duals from hell, and Super-Ego types are sort of like Activity Partners from hell.

  9. #29
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by senza tema View Post
    Umm, what else. IEEs make me feel like I'm not quick enough on my feet or that I'm too rigid and harsh in my standards or too crude and unrefined (though that's more rare). I've also reacted poorly when people on here (particularly @Ginkgo) accused me of being too pessimistic and dismissive of people and their possible trajectories of growth (when I felt like I was just being realistic and responding to the scenario as it was.)
    I don't recall the exact wording used in the interactions you're referring to, and I'll make reservations for the possibility that I took it more personally than was intended. However, I believe that it's bad form to get in the habit of thinking of anyone as literally hopeless. Thoughts turn into action and pretty soon you wind up, at worst, damaging people, and at best, making them resent you. I have such an averse reaction to it because to make such a judgment without the concrete evidence gained from further investigation raises red flags about a person's own perceived shortcomings, so the end result looks like you're cursing someone in the most baseless, bitter way possible. It sort of reminds me of the Bible thumpers I grew up with who would claim, "You're going to hell if you do xyz." I always thought, "You don't know that; you're just rattled by a fear that can only sustain itself if you have someone to infect with it".

    Anyway, I'm not trying to get you to think as I do or to act as I do. Just my two cents, a product of my own biases.

    ---

    Se PoLR

    I definitely harbor insecurities with my Se. The impending feeling that I'm not measuring up to my potential, or that I can't grasp opportunities, frequently burdens my mind. I envy successful risk-takers. When I attempt to take initiative, it leaves me feeling drained and hollow, even though not everyone can see it. When the outcome leaves something to be desired, gambling like this is reduced to a complete waste until I collect myself and glean whatever wisdom of hindsight I can from my failures. I probably project onto everyone a slight feeling that they expect me to aim higher or to serve them. When I interact with those who don't hold those expectations, I can become slightly disoriented, which makes the process of making myself appealing almost invariably abysmal.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    The functions descriptions here sound similar to the MBTI descriptions?

    And about the Ego and Id being strongest...how come...? I mean what's the basis of that? Basically?
    The basis of that is the fact that Lead Thinkers, for example, are adept at using both introverted thinking and extroverted thinking, but find one more preferable, thus casting the opposing attitude to the preferred attitude down to the ignoring function, or the "I know I can do that easily but I don't really want to, it's boring and tedious". Meanwhile, the Super-Ego functions are the weakest due to the fact that they are a constant source of pain to the Ego when they are critiqued by others, and the fact that they are virtually impossible to improve without some shortcomings. The Super-Id functions, however, are unconscious and therefore somewhat easier to use, which sometimes even creates the common mistype involving the Hidden Agenda function, due to the fact that it can "inflate", making the user think that this function is their lead function and that the user is masterful at it when really everyone else who sees the individual using that function sees it as being "over-the-top" or laughably embarrassing for the user.

    Assuming that the function order must trickle down with strength to weakness is faulty. The functions are still based off of Jung's psychological types, so the function order is just changed to better divide the conscious functions from the unconscious functions.

    INFJ: Ni - Fe - Ti - Se - Ne - Fi - Te - Si

    INFp: Ni - Fe - Si - Te - Se - Ti - Ne - Fi

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