The PoLR Thread

[infinite]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

 

[infinite]

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.

 

[011235813]

Like [MENTION=18664]Stansmith[/MENTION], 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 [MENTION=5759]edchidna1000[/MENTION] 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 [MENTION=8031]Ginkgo[/MENTION]) 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.

 

[infinite]

Like [MENTION=18664]Stansmith[/MENTION], 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 [MENTION=5759]edchidna1000[/MENTION] 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

 

[011235813]

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.)

 

[infinite]

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.

 

[yeghor]

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?

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

[MENTION=9075]infinity[/MENTION]

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.

 

[Ginkgo]

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 [MENTION=8031]Ginkgo[/MENTION]) 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.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

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

 

[yeghor]

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

I don't berate myself over my super-ego functions though... i.e. I am fine with my Si and my Te...though I feel a need to write down whatever is in my mind cause I can forget it easily if I don't...where in MBTI order as you can see my Si is the "weakest"? but I don't sweat over it or feel bad when people call me absent-minded... And I have been improving my Te...?

And I am aware that my Se (i.e. super-id) sucks...though I tend to believe I've developed my other super-id function Ti...though I have to concentrate hard on it to make it work... which sometimes makes my head hurt, like in one of my earlier posts herein...I need to force "it" to work...

So how do all these play into the system?

 

[yeghor]

[MENTION=20385]Alea_iacta_est[/MENTION],

Another interesting thing is that I relate more to this description than this...

Does that mean my socionics type is actually INFj (EII)?

This makes more sense cause in the socionics INFj type the super-ego block (that we feel inferior and shameful when criticized about according to the theory in OP) is made up of Ti and Se (the same as MBTI)... So that would make my PoLR = Se...?

...which would bring me full circle to my #2 post...

 

[yeghor]

Parts of EII (INFj) description that I relate are marked in Bold as follows:

Introverted Ethics (Fi)

EIIs are very attuned to the psychological atmosphere of interaction and to their own feelings towards people and things. They treasure deep feelings of attachment and strive to deepen emotional bonds between people and harmonize relationships. When those people that the EII is close to suffer emotionally, the EII will do everything in her power to raise the emotional condition in the individual, often at the EII's expense.

EIIs are very capable of "sizing people up". They rely heavily on their instincts to understand the inner feelings of an individual. They are very empathetic people and find it very easy to feel with others. This makes them very sensitive to the moods of people, and they treat them the way they want to be treated, that is, with respect.

Extroverted Intuition (Ne)

EIIs have a natural understanding of people's inner makeup and see what can be done with that makeup to bring them closer to ideals. EIIs have a very well-developed view of what people and relationships should be like and are able to help others reach those ideals.

EIIs understand people very well. They often give good advice, and have a strong understanding of the inner workings of even the most complicated minds. They have well developed ideas concerning ideal emotional states for individuals, and always have advice as to how an individual can reach that ideal.

One of the largest complaints of EIIs revolve around the idea of "wasted potential." A lot of their neuroses, and "drive," come from fears that they are not achieving the maximum possible ideal in a certain field or area of life. Unlike IEEs, though, EIIs consider "leveraging potential" more in terms of depth - mastery of one or several specific areas - rather than breadth.

This makes sense, IEE = ENFP in MBTI...

Introverted Logic (Ti,)

EIIs are not easily able to abstract themselves from the human dimension and apply "cold" logic. When they try to do this, they easily become unsure if their reasoning is correct. EIIs feel that not everything can be classified under the system since everything has its unique individual attributes.

Hmm ??? Don't know...

Extroverted Sensing (Se)

EIIs are typically negligent of their surroundings and have difficulty keeping track of objects or constantly monitoring things and people around them. They can be passive and self-absorbed, often preferring to wait for things to happen rather than make them happen. As such, they tend to have quite a number of lost opportunities. To a certain extent, EIIs can be oblivious to hints from someone who is romantically interested in them. (Oh I can notice now...I can read body language relatively easily now...I am in mid 30s and I am not after casual sex or dead end relationships though so I let them slide...) Therefore, this gives the other party the wrong impression that they are not interested in them.

Outsiders often think the EII is oblivious to reality because they will often neglect basic needs (Oh not really, I look after myself). Although it is by no means necessary, this may also manifest itself as a general rejection or aversion to violence or force as a means or way of life.

Extroverted Logic (Te)

EIIs have a great admiration for people who are able to get things done neatly and efficiently in the outside world. They themselves consistently forget to consider whether their activities are actually achieving their intended goal, whether their time spent is bringing worthy proceeds, and whether their activities are organized in the most rational way. They subconsciously expect and appreciate it when others take interest in the effectiveness of their activities and helps to take an objective look at what they are doing. (Not really identify with this paragraph...do admire people with commanding voices and people who are articulate and good orators though...)

EIIs are usually very curious and thirsty for information. When they have an interest in a particular topic or subject, they will try their best to read anything and everything about it in order to gain a thorough understanding. They are willing to listen to anyone who is knowledgeable or has a brilliant idea to share regardless of whether that individual is an expert or authority in his/her field since they strongly believe that there are many perspectives in an issue.

Introverted Sensing (Si)

EIIs tend to build up stress related to their work-related activities and go overboard in their attempt to be exemplary at work and in all other areas of life. They need people and situations to help them relax and take it easy and forget about their idealism for a while to just enjoy the moment as it is. EIIs can be prone to laziness and always seek the most convenient way in doing things. Moreover, rather than prioritizing their tasks based on their level of urgency or/and importance, they prefer to complete the tasks based on their liking and at their own pace. When they are preoccupied with a hobby, they tend to lose track of time and can be late with their appointments with others. As a result, they don't really have good time management skills.(Yes with the bolded part but with the remaining parts not really...)

Extroverted Ethics (Fe)

EIIs can become expressive and very lively in groups for brief periods of time, but they always gravitate to deep, focused communication between two people or a small, close-knit group. They tend to shun wildness and prefer serious, more sensitive communication.

EIIs are usually very straightforward about their feelings in front of others; what you see from them is what you get. Even at a party where everyone is supposed to be happy, they still find it hard to conceal their true feelings when they are in a bad mood. This can create distaste among the rest who feel that the EII is not cooperating by contributing to the positive and boisterous mood. This tends to lead others who don't know the EII well to have a misconception that he/she is a grouchy person by nature.

(Yes, my mood manifests itself on my face, I suck at concealing it... and yes to the distaste part... people get personally offended by my bad mood and may even try to get even or feel better by proclaiming that I am "not normal"...)

Introverted Intuition (Ni)

The individual is quite adept at following discussions on the developments of present trends into the future and at contributing to them on occasion if he feels so inclined, but he does not take that as seriously compared to investigating possibilities in the areas he is interested in at present. He usually dismisses supernatural claims as being silly, wishful thinking, unless they happen to be related to the very specific religion he feels inclined to believe in and which he may be inclined to make part of his leisure activities. (Yeah I tend to not believe in supernatural but am also inclined to purse spiritualist practices etc...)

The individual is also not naive to future happenings. He will often warn others of negative consequences. In this way, he uses his Ni to help the PoLR of his dual. However, unlike an EIE, he will not often take his own advice nor expect others to. His Se PoLR makes it impossible for him to demand that others heed his advice, and his Ne-ego makes him place more value in the possibility that he is wrong - and that things will play out differently - than in avoiding foreseeable disasters. (Yes, Yes, Yes,...but I am now giving more weight to my hunches...)

 

[infinite]

The functions descriptions here sound similar to the MBTI descriptions?

Nope... You really think Se and Si are that similar? Se is more like a mix of MBTI Se and Te. Si is mix of MBTI Se and something else. Or, Ni for example has elements of MBTI Si. Fe also. I could go on (Seriously, that MBTI Si thing is just really weird anyway)

From a source I do not recall but could find upon request

Yeah please find it

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.

I don't know. I'm sure someone who holds the view that the conflictor is just a long distance psychologically, would find something to argue for that view just like you did now with the opposite view As I said I don't remember where I read it, sorry.

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).

Again, where was this described, that we value people who use our superego functions better? I have never seen this. I also didn't see anything about such attraction to superego types in place of the dual types.

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.

That all sounds nice but what about a true proven psychopath for example. I do agree about the part though that it's good to hold off judgment until there's concrete evidence.

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.

I didn't understand your last two sentences; what's the problem with it if someone doesn't hold those expectations about you?

Parts of EII (INFj) description that I relate are marked in Bold as follows:

Compare Te PoLR and Se PoLR yet?

Make a thread on your type, IEI vs EII, I'm interested.

 

[yeghor]

Nope... You really think Se and Si are that similar? Se is more like a mix of MBTI Se and Te. Si is mix of MBTI Se and something else. Or, Ni for example has elements of MBTI Si. Fe also. I could go on (Seriously, that MBTI Si thing is just really weird anyway

They still sound similar to me... I don't see a "global" difference... But if what you are saying is true, it would be very difficult to make a direct correlation and comparison between socionics and MBTI...

Compare Te PoLR and Se PoLR yet?

Make a thread on your type, IEI vs EII, I'm interested.

IEI description sounds like that of an aristocrat or something..

You can check my thoughts about myself here...

 

[infinite]

They still sound similar to me... I don't see a "global" difference... But if what you are saying is true, it would be very difficult to make a direct correlation and comparison between socionics and MBTI...

What would be a global difference for you, then?

Yes it's difficult to make direct correlations because of that, though logical comparison is still possible in some ways.

IEI description sounds like that of an aristocrat or something..

You can check my thoughts about myself here...

EII is aristocrat dichotomy too in socionics

What did you personally mean by that though?

That thread you linked to is pretty long... I think if you're interested in figuring out this IEI vs EII issue for you, you should really make a socionics typing thread in the typing forum section. I'm sure people will try to help.

 

[Ginkgo]

That all sounds nice but what about a true proven psychopath for example. I do agree about the part though that it's good to hold off judgment until there's concrete evidence.

I think you're missing the context of the dialogue between senza and I, so I'm going to have to shift it in order to accommodate you. From a broader and more practical POV, we're discussing management of expectations. If you understand the defining features of an individual, then you know where they could go and what they have to offer. If you don't think they have anything to offer, then your vision is limited only to a select number of venues; perhaps in the case of a psychopath, you would be too wary of them to allow them a venue, even though they could be a constructive presence given the correct incentives and circumstances. Indeed, plenty of CEOs and politicians excel with psychopathic traits and wind up benefiting someone somewhere. But if you think that I, personally, would consciously deal with a psychopath up close and personal, then you are wrong. And frankly, I could care less about them. The individuals senza and I were discussing however many months ago could have used medication and supportive environments to supplement their growth. To say that they were hopeless would be tantamount to saying that they lacked the choice to be medicated.

I didn't understand your last two sentences; what's the problem with it if someone doesn't hold those expectations about you?

It's not so much a problem with it, so much as the disorientation is an unfortunate consequence of suffering from a blindspot.

 

[infinite]

I think you're missing the context of the dialogue between senza and I, so I'm going to have to shift it in order to accommodate you. From a broader and more practical POV, we're discussing management of expectations. If you understand the defining features of an individual, then you know where they could go and what they have to offer. If you don't think they have anything to offer, then your vision is limited only to a select number of venues; perhaps in the case of a psychopath, you would be too wary of them to allow them a venue, even though they could be a constructive presence given the correct incentives and circumstances. Indeed, plenty of CEOs and politicians excel with psychopathic traits and wind up benefiting someone somewhere. But if you think that I, personally, would consciously deal with a psychopath up close and personal, then you are wrong. And frankly, I could care less about them. The individuals senza and I were discussing however many months ago could have used medication and supportive environments to supplement their growth. To say that they were hopeless would be tantamount to saying that they lacked the choice to be medicated.

Okay, that makes perfect sense.

It's not so much a problem with it, so much as the disorientation is an unfortunate consequence of suffering from a blindspot.

OK, I may have misread or missing the context again but I don't really understand why it disorients you when someone doesn't expect you to be/do certain things. And what did you mean by making yourself appealing, as related to this issue?

 

[Ginkgo]

OK, I may have misread or missing the context again but I don't really understand why it disorients you when someone doesn't expect you to be/do certain things. And what did you mean by making yourself appealing, as related to this issue?

The last time this happened to me was at a job interview. They had some vacant positions, but they were looking for the right person. In situations like that, you have to sell yourself, sometimes with the knowledge that even though you could perform, you're only one out of a number of available options. So you're not necessarily needed. If my goals are meant to be entirely self-serving, then things sort of fall into disarray in my mind. Ends aren't met. Does that clarify things?

 

[HongDou]

It's funny because [MENTION=11928]Vetani[/MENTION] is Fi polr while I'm Ti polr (ExTp vs ExFp) and often, a lot of what is considered simple to one of us has to be thoroughly explained to the other. But it definitely provides a sense of grasping that vulnerable function from being with someone that values it. I can't think of anything specific, so maybe he can chime in.