Socionics Video Questionnaire - Find out your Socionics Type

[valaki]

Sure, if an SxE wants something, they might have difficulty with patience and holding back from doing what they want to do. They will have difficulty with either social or legal rules or customs in the way of the thing of desire.

Well that fits me too well

Nevertheless, they are good at doing whatever it takes to get what they want. They're not so easily distracted unlike IxEs because they don't look so much at other things they could be doing so much as the things they are doing and the advancement that brings.

OK, well, I'm not the type that gets distracted, that's for sure. I'm really good at doing whatever I need to do to get something.

But I can procrastinate on tasks that I'm not really that motivated to do before e.g. a deadline... or if there is no deadline or other external circumstance forcing me to do it, the task to do just stays in background for really long. I do shit instead that I'm motivated to do and/or more interested in.

So that's what I meant about bad self-discipline Does that fit the picture?

An SxE is a forceful character and they can force themselves as much as they can force others. If it's a question of willpower they excel in this area.

Well sure, but if I'm not motivated then what?

Btw, I'd like to know what you see as forceful as a Ne lead type. Are you more sensitive to this sort of Se stuff than Se types are? I hope my question makes sense

In which case you could be Se-leading and feeling especially insecure in the rare situation where you aren't at your best new aspect of your leading function.

Okay. Overall I'm really good at acquiring skills, I just start out slow. Or at least it feels slow to me lol sometimes doesn't seem so to others


Another question about Ne role: role function is supposedly something that you sometimes try to be better at, because of society's expectations/norms etc., you just don't focus on it for long so you don't really manage to get better. In the case of Ne, as role function, what would that mean? Trying to see more viewpoints? Trying to be better at "outside of the box" thinking? Or what?

Ne PoLR is seen in LSI and ESI... Unlike SEE and SLE, LSI and ESI are of the IJ temperament, they prefer to stick to a certain order of things in a straightforward manner, whether sentiment or logic based. As a result, they end up completely unable to adjust themselves to the chaotic unpredictability of Ne where instead of there being a clear way of doing things, there are lots of possible ways.

SLE and SEE are able to adapt a certain amount because they are of the EP temperament, they may prefer not to go to possibility X if they are set on thing Y, but they can do it if necessary. For an LSI or ESI, this change of goals is very disturbing, their structure or sentiments being set around Y and a change to X requiring a major upheaval of their IJ framework.

OK.

For an IxE, such changes are quite natural... if something looks greener on the other side, the IxE will need to be prevented by his friends to stop him throwing down what he's doing and rushing off.

Lol

 

[valaki]

Not so sure about the last statement. I'd agree 'Fi-valuing'--a tendency to gauge subjective distance, between myself and others, is near-definite. It's a strong suit of mine, but possibly as something that has developed rather than is innate.

But by 'love-hate relationship with people,' I mean with society on the whole; I'm pretty comfortable gauging out the psychological distance between myself and any given individual. Related, I get frustrated when others can't seem to 'read me,' either because of (what I perceive as) social ineptitude, apathy, or selfishness. I deeply treasure those who actually understand me.

Out of curiosity, what do you expect others to do exactly? What do you mean by wanting them to "read you"?

Understanding individual systems to me is subservient to developing a greater understanding. I tend toward synthesizing systems of thought and extracting their commonalities in order to gain some piece of wisdom that transcends any individual system. For example, one typology system provides one perspective on human cognition--but a synthesis of many typologies can provide a holistic understanding of the self, others, and human nature in general; the synthesis would point to how people organize information, which in turn illuminates why we bother to do so in the first place, and.. the rabbit trail goes on and on. Sometimes with a particular application in mind, viz. technology and humanity; often also for its own sake or for self-development.

Oh, is that how TeNi thinks?

Don't get my tone wrong. Just wondered.

 

[garbage]

Out of curiosity, what do you expect others to do exactly? What do you mean by wanting them to "read you"?

Good question, you're making me think about it enough to try to put it into words.

Some people talk for.. well, I don't know why, other than to hear themselves talk, rather than to have an actual conversation. In this way, they "take" more than they "give." They'll push their agenda or their problems without bothering to reciprocate the whole "listening" thing. Interrupting or otherwise asserting myself only goes so far, as they'll re-rail as they see fit. People eventually realize that I don't 'play' like that, and they'll stop talking to me and turn their attention to those who do.

I don't expect people to reciprocate, per se; they gonna do what they gonna do. Believe you me, I don't mean that in a pessimistic 'screw other people' or in a 'waugh nobody understands me' sort of way. The relationship between us is what it is; no regrets or disappointment.

Now, that's for the everyday stuff, casual conversations, and acquaintances. As far as more deeply 'understanding me,' I'm not even sure what I mean. Something about how and why I tick. And, hell, I'd love to understand the other as well.

Oh, is that how TeNi thinks?

Don't get my tone wrong. Just wondered.

Maybe so. Reading back, it at least sounds like an Ni thing. I ruminate in the same way about societal concerns; and, in fact, many of my ruminations about anything at all wind back into self- and other-discovery--realizing how the world works, how I'm intertwined with it, etc.

(Did I actually say "rabbit trail"? Dammit, I of course meant "rabbit hole." )

 

[Such Irony]

Yes, you're an LII, an insightful (creative Ne), physically-unaware (weak Se), socially-awkward (weak Fe), list-making (leading Ti), LII-brarian.

http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/LII-INTj/
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/289-INTj-The-Analyst-Profile-by-Gulenko
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/127-Robespierre-Male-Portrait-INTj-by-Beskova
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/129-Robespierre-Female-Portrait-INTj-by-Beskova

Thanks. As I was writing my response I was thinking this must scream LII and the whole desireable environment thing looks like something right out of alpha quadra. I guess I just wanted validation for my type.

 

[valaki]

Some people talk for.. well, I don't know why, other than to hear themselves talk, rather than to have an actual conversation. In this way, they "take" more than they "give." They'll push their agenda or their problems without bothering to reciprocate the whole "listening" thing. Interrupting or otherwise asserting myself only goes so far, as they'll re-rail as they see fit. People eventually realize that I don't 'play' like that, and they'll stop talking to me and turn their attention to those who do.

Ahh I knew some people like that. I stopped talking to them pretty quickly. I will only endure one such session. It's really simple, I will gladly listen but I want to be heard as well. 50/50 is reasonable I think.

Anyway how is that to do with "reading" you in general? Reading the desire that you'd like to talk too?

As far as more deeply 'understanding me,' I'm not even sure what I mean. Something about how and why I tick. And, hell, I'd love to understand the other as well.

Yeah sounds good

Maybe so. Reading back, it at least sounds like an Ni thing. I ruminate in the same way about societal concerns; and, in fact, many of my ruminations about anything at all wind back into self- and other-discovery--realizing how the world works, how I'm intertwined with it, etc.

How is it different from Ne?

(Did I actually say "rabbit trail"? Dammit, I of course meant "rabbit hole." )

It was funny. ;p

Thanks. As I was writing my response I was thinking this must scream LII and the whole desireable environment thing looks like something right out of alpha quadra. I guess I just wanted validation for my type.

Yeah I was thinking to myself reading it that it was too stereotypical LII But if you're really like that and especially if you like being yourself, cool then

 

[valaki]

[MENTION=5578]garbage[/MENTION]

In another thread you said: "but a part of me was jealous of his ability to retain facts (a weakness of mine)." --- LIE wouldn't feel this way would they? More like Te superid, this?

 

[garbage]

[MENTION=5578]garbage[/MENTION]

In another thread you said: "but a part of me was jealous of his ability to retain facts (a weakness of mine)." --- LIE wouldn't feel this way would they? More like Te superid, this?

Could be. I'm told very often that I'm more of a synthesist, or one who connects facts together, than a.. fact-rememberer. That is, once I have 'em, I develop a very broad (or deep) mental picture easily. Dunno if that's a product of a very tight interplay between Te and Ni, or Te in the super-id; or whether Te doesn't necessarily involve remembering facts.

Also, my latest stupid test results, from sociotype dot com:

Your Sociotype: SLI-3Te (ISTp)
ILI (INTp): 99% as likely as SLI.
ILE (ENTp): 89% as likely as SLI.
LIE (ENTj): 88% as likely as SLI.​

I have no idea how the hell SLI got all up in there

 

[valaki]

Could be. I'm told very often that I'm more of a synthesist, or one who connects facts together, than a.. fact-rememberer. That is, once I have 'em, I develop a very broad (or deep) mental picture easily. Dunno if that's a product of a very tight interplay between Te and Ni, or Te in the super-id; or whether Te doesn't necessarily involve remembering facts.

I think Te involves remembering of facts or how can the Te type act so logically and efficiently otherwise?

I'm also more like you btw. Well, I can remember facts in the relevant context very well, but I'm otherwise not terribly focused on them, not too much meaning on their own, I believe that means Ti valuing over Te valuing.

Broad mental picture still sounds Ne-ish to me but that's just a superficial guess.

Oh and I'm still interested in answers to my previous post to you, I think you forgot to check that one.

Also, my latest stupid test results, from sociotype dot com:

Your Sociotype: SLI-3Te (ISTp)
ILI (INTp): 99% as likely as SLI.
ILE (ENTp): 89% as likely as SLI.
LIE (ENTj): 88% as likely as SLI.​

I have no idea how the hell SLI got all up in there

Interesting lol. I guess you didn't really move the slider much for S/N questions...

 

[EJCC]

My video can be found here.

Have at it.

 

[garbage]

Oops, here we go. Sorry that most of this is a non-response, but I think I could only provide guesses.

Ahh I knew some people like that. I stopped talking to them pretty quickly. I will only endure one such session. It's really simple, I will gladly listen but I want to be heard as well. 50/50 is reasonable I think.

Anyway how is that to do with "reading" you in general? Reading the desire that you'd like to talk too?

That sounds about right. Being able to pay some damn attention, really; as there's no point otherwise.

How is it different from Ne? [...] Broad mental picture still sounds Ne-ish to me but that's just a superficial guess.
[...]
I think Te involves remembering of facts or how can the Te type act so logically and efficiently otherwise? [...] I'm also more like you btw. Well, I can remember facts in the relevant context very well, but I'm otherwise not terribly focused on them, not too much meaning on their own, I believe that means Ti valuing over Te valuing.

You've got me on all of these questions. I have some guesses, but I'm no expert. I suppose we need a professional Socionicistist dude to help us out.

Interesting lol. I guess you didn't really move the slider much for S/N questions...

There were a bunch of sliders that I rammed straight toward the N side (though some others, possibly not so much), so I don't know what the hell. Some questions aren't related to ego functions directly, but to what one 'values' and 'doesn't value'--those that try to tease out your quadra, super-ego, and ego-functions. Maybe I responded with many sliders on individual functions that pointed to Nx (Ni or Ne) over Sx in the ego, but then screwed up the test with some unexpected responses to those 'valuation' questions. e.g. "This guy's responses indicate that he values Ne? Welp, he's gotta have some Si all up in there."

The Extended Socionics test is 1/3 VI. That tends to muck up results even more, because VI is .. to put it lightly, not well-founded.

 

[garbage]

My video can be found here.

Have at it.

Sucks that you had a rough time recording a few takes, but it made for a great intro on this one. I think we should all record videos while we drink.

Wanting to understand things when it'll benefit you to understand them? Citing analysis as an ideal job? Being comforted by an environment where you can be direct without pissing people off? Voicing unpopular opinions? If that's not a flippin' Te-leading, I don't know what is.

(Then again, given my post right above this one, I really might not know what is )

 

[EJCC]

Sucks that you had a rough time recording a few takes, but it made for a great intro on this one. I think we should all record videos while we drink.

THERE'S a thread idea.

Wanting to understand things when it'll benefit you to understand them? Citing analysis as an ideal job? Being comforted by an environment where you can be direct without pissing people off? Voicing unpopular opinions? If that's not a flippin' Te-leading, I don't know what is.

(Then again, given my post right above this one, I really might not know what is )

My primary reason for recording that video is that I have No Idea what distinguishes the MBTI from Socionics -- besides the fact that one is Russian and involves lowercase j's and p's. Descriptions of ESTj seem a bit... milder?... than descriptions of ESTJ, too, but I couldn't tell you a basis for that if you held a gun to my head.

I guess I should read those earlier posts on Socionics Te, then. Will get back to you when I'm done.

 

[valaki]

Oops, here we go. Sorry that most of this is a non-response, but I think I could only provide guesses.

No worries

You've got me on all of these questions. I have some guesses, but I'm no expert. I suppose we need a professional Socionicistist dude to help us out.

Want to talk about the guesses?

There were a bunch of sliders that I rammed straight toward the N side (though some others, possibly not so much), so I don't know what the hell. Some questions aren't related to ego functions directly, but to what one 'values' and 'doesn't value'--those that try to tease out your quadra, super-ego, and ego-functions. Maybe I responded with many sliders on individual functions that pointed to Nx (Ni or Ne) over Sx in the ego, but then screwed up the test with some unexpected responses to those 'valuation' questions. e.g. "This guy's responses indicate that he values Ne? Welp, he's gotta have some Si all up in there."

Maybe it's the Ne valuing too, yes. But some questions aim at N/S dichotomy itself. I meant that mainly.

The Extended Socionics test is 1/3 VI. That tends to muck up results even more, because VI is .. to put it lightly, not well-founded.

I'm not quite sure if the photo part is included in the results. I was guessing not because it didn't seem to change my results really. Unless I was really picking the right choices for each pair of photos just like someone with my type should, according to VI ;p

I also thought that it was experimental, the VI part, so that was another reason why I thought it wasn't factored into the final result

Does anyone know for sure?

 

[valaki]

Wanting to understand things when it'll benefit you to understand them? Citing analysis as an ideal job? Being comforted by an environment where you can be direct without pissing people off? Voicing unpopular opinions? If that's not a flippin' Te-leading, I don't know what is.

Hmm... The latter two are true for me too. I thought the thing about being able to voice opinions without pissing people off was a Ti ego desire. But yeah I guess it could be Te just fine, the first one especially (understand things only if it benefits you)

My primary reason for recording that video is that I have No Idea what distinguishes the MBTI from Socionics -- besides the fact that one is Russian and involves lowercase j's and p's. Descriptions of ESTj seem a bit... milder?... than descriptions of ESTJ, too, but I couldn't tell you a basis for that if you held a gun to my head.

Yes Socionics ESTj is "milder" than MBTI ESTJ because certain MBTI Te characteristics are associated with Se in socionics. And ESTj doesn't have Se, just Te. ESTp description then gets some MBTI ESTJ-ish stuff. Stuff about organizing crap.

I guess I should read those earlier posts on Socionics Te, then. Will get back to you when I'm done.

Oh not much in those posts honestly. You should read wikisocion.org on Te instead

 

[EJCC]

A-yup. I treat the body as a nuisance that gets in the way of something--whether it be action, productivity, or thought.

Meant to say earlier that this was the part of your video that I related to the most. Then again, we've talked about that similarity more than once on the forum, I think.

I tend to see myself as having two modes: Doing what I want, and being unable to do what I want because something is in my way. That "something" is very often a physical (or mental) need that's weakening me or throwing me off. I end up like a wind-up toy that got tipped over: revving and revving and wondering why I'm not going anywhere. Difference is that for me, emotional needs get placed in the same box as physical, and throw me off just as much.

Good question, you're making me think about it enough to try to put it into words.

^ This is why I love this forum.

Some people talk for.. well, I don't know why, other than to hear themselves talk, rather than to have an actual conversation. In this way, they "take" more than they "give." They'll push their agenda or their problems without bothering to reciprocate the whole "listening" thing. Interrupting or otherwise asserting myself only goes so far, as they'll re-rail as they see fit. People eventually realize that I don't 'play' like that, and they'll stop talking to me and turn their attention to those who do.

I don't expect people to reciprocate, per se; they gonna do what they gonna do. Believe you me, I don't mean that in a pessimistic 'screw other people' or in a 'waugh nobody understands me' sort of way. The relationship between us is what it is; no regrets or disappointment.

Now, that's for the everyday stuff, casual conversations, and acquaintances. As far as more deeply 'understanding me,' I'm not even sure what I mean. Something about how and why I tick. And, hell, I'd love to understand the other as well.

Does it have to do with reciprocation? "Understanding" as a sign that they put in the effort to listen to you perspectives and absorb them in the same way that you do with theirs?

I think Te involves remembering of facts or how can the Te type act so logically and efficiently otherwise?

I don't know how well this translates to Socionics, but my absolute favorite description of everyday (MBTI) Si vs. everyday (MBTI) Ni, on the internet, describes Ni as always re-absorbing and re-learning, and being bad at retaining details. Specifically relating to making a sandwich for the first time and then a second time, it has the Si person having this gut reaction of "this feels right" -- somewhere between gut/intuition and muscle memory -- and the Ni person working it out via "what makes the most sense", without any reference to the first time they made the sandwich.

So... If that's how Si and Ni are in Socionics, as well, then I'd attribute it to that, and not Te.

 

[valaki]

Meant to say earlier that this was the part of your video that I related to the most. Then again, we've talked about that similarity more than once on the forum, I think.

I tend to see myself as having two modes: Doing what I want, and being unable to do what I want because something is in my way. That "something" is very often a physical (or mental) need that's weakening me or throwing me off. I end up like a wind-up toy that got tipped over: revving and revving and wondering why I'm not going anywhere. Difference is that for me, emotional needs get placed in the same box as physical, and throw me off just as much.

Hmm in that case you are not ESTj in Socionics. If you meant it like the body is ONLY a nuisance and nothing more. ESTj's are more in tune with bodily needs than that. Though, sure, Si (Socionics Si) can get in the way of doing productive things so ESTj's supposedly prefer to get the Te job done before focusing on Si (body needs in this case) more.

But do wait for [MENTION=5759]edchidna1000[/MENTION], he's got more experience with this Socionics typing stuff

I don't know how well this translates to Socionics, but my absolute favorite description of everyday (MBTI) Si vs. everyday (MBTI) Ni, on the internet, describes Ni as always re-absorbing and re-learning, and being bad at retaining details. Specifically relating to making a sandwich for the first time and then a second time, it has the Si person having this gut reaction of "this feels right" -- somewhere between gut/intuition and muscle memory -- and the Ni person working it out via "what makes the most sense", without any reference to the first time they made the sandwich.

So... If that's how Si and Ni are in Socionics, as well, then I'd attribute it to that, and not Te.

No, that's not what Si and Ni are in Socionics. I was using Socionics Te and not MBTI Te definition

 

[WorldSocionics]

Whoa, thanks!

Gamma-NT is not out of the realm of possibility, nor is 'Ni-ego' in general. Gamma-NT and IEE don't seem so much alike at first glance, but they're both 'competent with' Ni and Ne, and 'value' Fi. This thing also talks about how a Gamma-NT (namely the ILI) may be confused with IEE:

(I'm sure that you've seen this particular resource before, but I include it here because it's highly relevant.)

Crikey, that's a terrible resource! Since when are ILIs charming and able to make any topic interesting? The ability to make themselves appeal to others is exactly what ILI lacks.

When in doubt, just look at whether the person values Si or not. You really don't seem to value it based on what you have said about your body and this strongly suggests a valuing of Ni and Se over Ne and Si, which would make you a Gamma rather than an Delta assuming you value Fi and Te.

For IEEs, Si is highly valued. They are the sort of people who may forget to take care of themselves but are greatly appreciative of positive physical sensations. These are the people who always ask for a particular cappuccino at their favourite coffee shop, who enjoy sleeping in from time to time and having someone make them breakfast in bed.

For an LIE it's more... "Oh, I've been working all night, I'm falling asleep. I need caffeine." "What coffee would you like?" "The cheapest one that does the job."

Not so sure about the last statement. I'd agree 'Fi-valuing'--a tendency to gauge subjective distance, between myself and others, is near-definite. It's a strong suit of mine, but possibly as something that has developed rather than is innate.

Would you say this is as strong as your ability to strategise and do things productively?

But by 'love-hate relationship with people,' I mean with society on the whole; I'm pretty comfortable gauging out the psychological distance between myself and any given individual. Related, I get frustrated when others can't seem to 'read me,' either because of (what I perceive as) social ineptitude, apathy, or selfishness. I deeply treasure those who actually understand me.

So you bring certain social demands when dealing with others? What else do you expect from others?

Understanding individual systems to me is subservient to developing a greater understanding. I tend toward synthesizing systems of thought and extracting their commonalities in order to gain some piece of wisdom that transcends any individual system. For example, one typology system provides one perspective on human cognition--but a synthesis of many typologies can provide a holistic understanding of the self, others, and human nature in general; the synthesis would point to how people organize information, which in turn illuminates why we bother to do so in the first place, and.. the rabbit trail goes on and on. Sometimes with a particular application in mind, viz. technology and humanity; often also for its own sake or for self-development.

That sounds like Ti in the Id block to me. You seem to be good at Ti, you just don't use it for its own sake. The Gamma NT will have a good grasp of systems, but rather than stick to one for consistency they will bastardise the information into a holistic, working model.

Schedules feel constraining--I feel at ease when I'm flexible. Leading projects gives me satisfaction, as do teamwork, mentoring, and fostering talent. Leadership also allows me to be one step ahead of my life, so to speak, which grants me that flexibility. I want to be free to 'do stuff,' most often with an intellectual and creative bent, and quite often (but not always) with the desire to make an impact.

So would you say that you tend to/want to drop scheduled events and go off on a whim?

A-yup. I treat the body as a nuisance that gets in the way of something--whether it be action, productivity, or thought.

That is very Te>Si... The LIE sees relaxation as a waste of time.

In short, Gamma-NT is reasonable. .. and also probably right. What about ILI? It seems plausible, but probably less so than LIE.

ILI is possible, but the way you talk about leadership suggests someone who is a lot more proactive and out there than an ILI.

The difference is temperament. An Linear-Assertive type like LIE strives to do everything productively. They might work themselves into an ill state of health because relaxation and enjoying the little things isn't useful. They tend to do as much of use as they can. They will also try to lead others and push them to do things better.

A Receptive-Adaptive type like ILI just prefers to sit and think about what might happen later. Actually going out and doing something is not the priority and often they need a bit of a push. They're the sort to think up a winning strategy in their head without actually summoning the gusto to do anything with it. They usually can't give a damn about how other people feel towards them.

As for IEE, they're more the sort to do things just because they feel like doing them. They might want to set up a consultancy and get all involved in the beginning stages before getting bored with the legal paperwork and backing out. Usually they will aspire towards being productive but fail because they cannot be sufficiently productive without adhering to systems and restrictions when necessary.

 

[WorldSocionics]

OK, well, I'm not the type that gets distracted, that's for sure. I'm really good at doing whatever I need to do to get something.

But I can procrastinate on tasks that I'm not really that motivated to do before e.g. a deadline... or if there is no deadline or other external circumstance forcing me to do it, the task to do just stays in background for really long. I do shit instead that I'm motivated to do and/or more interested in.

I'm getting mixed messages here.

So that's what I meant about bad self-discipline Does that fit the picture?

I definitely see that you're an EP temperament. Would you say that you are a competitive person who goes straight for the thing of desire and does everything they can to get it, or are you the sort who gives as much an attempt as their interest will last and will happily settle for a new alternative when offered?

Well sure, but if I'm not motivated then what?

The Se-lead would say "no pain, no game"

Btw, I'd like to know what you see as forceful as a Ne lead type. Are you more sensitive to this sort of Se stuff than Se types are? I hope my question makes sense

Whenever I try and push people to do things, asserting myself on others in order to get my own way. This would be Se.

Another question about Ne role: role function is supposedly something that you sometimes try to be better at, because of society's expectations/norms etc., you just don't focus on it for long so you don't really manage to get better. In the case of Ne, as role function, what would that mean? Trying to see more viewpoints? Trying to be better at "outside of the box" thinking? Or what?

Say, the offensive approach hasn't worked. The Se-lead might order a brainstorm to think of alternatives to the initial plan.

 

[valaki]

As for IEE, they're more the sort to do things just because they feel like doing them. They might want to set up a consultancy and get all involved in the beginning stages before getting bored with the legal paperwork and backing out. Usually they will aspire towards being productive but fail because they cannot be sufficiently productive without adhering to systems and restrictions when necessary.

Uhm, doesn't the IEE ever feel they still want to go on if there's such obstacles?

I'm getting mixed messages here.

Why mixed? SxE's never procrastinate on tasks that they don't care about?

I definitely see that you're an EP temperament. Would you say that you are a competitive person who goes straight for the thing of desire and does everything they can to get it, or are you the sort who gives as much an attempt as their interest will last and will happily settle for a new alternative when offered?

I'm very competitive. I enjoy going straight for "thing of desire". I get really pissed off after a while if I can't get it - I'm impatient - and usually I'll just try more to get it. I can't say though that this impatience always helps me.

As for the second option, I don't understand this thing here, about IxE's (IEE above either), what does it depend on how long their interest will last? Until the first obstacle? Or until they get bored? If they get bored why/how do they get bored? Surely it does not just happen randomly?

The Se-lead would say "no pain, no game"

I am not talking about pain. I am talking about motivation to even start doing the goddamn thing.

If I started on something I will not stop until done. I enjoy that btw. Pain not an issue I enjoy the feeling of motivation as well. It usually feels like an intrinsic motivation so it's all good .

Starting, however depends on awakening that motivation; this can be brought on by several things. Two main categories: Challenges (physical or intellectual alike) & opportunities. 2) External deadline or other external circumstance that makes it necessary.

The first category, that's got several versions, can be competitiveness against others or challenges not involving other people. Or interaction with people that somehow brings up something, e.g. some opportunity and then I get set on it

Oh and in the cases when I'm just forced to do it (deadline for example), I can still enjoy the feeling of having the motivation that got me kicked into gear. I can also enjoy the intensity of trying to get it sorted asap. Even if the task is not something I would do on my own otherwise (not without procrastinating anyway). Does that make sense? It's hard to explain this well

So anyway when you said SxE's can force themselves with tasks they would otherwise not do, can they start such tasks without e.g. deadlines? That sounds like the ultimate self-discipline to me.

Whenever I try and push people to do things, asserting myself on others in order to get my own way. This would be Se.

OK, but do you not see it as different levels of force? I wouldn't call each and every example of that as truly "forceful". Some of them, sure

I noticed it's also individual perception. I see some people are sensitive, I say something and they get offended, along the lines of "don't command me" or even worse . The same thing ("pushing") coming from someone else, I'm not at all sensitive to it on my own end, my response to it will depend more on what I want.

Say, the offensive approach hasn't worked. The Se-lead might order a brainstorm to think of alternatives to the initial plan.

Offensive approach to what? Getting your own way? I can only comment the same as above about meaning of "forceful".

Anyway, ok, so there is no such thing as attempting to use Ne role for its own sake, because it's valued by society or something?

 

[valaki]

"Understanding individual systems to me is subservient to developing a greater understanding. I tend toward synthesizing systems of thought and extracting their commonalities in order to gain some piece of wisdom that transcends any individual system. For example, one typology system provides one perspective on human cognition--but a synthesis of many typologies can provide a holistic understanding of the self, others, and human nature in general; the synthesis would point to how people organize information, which in turn illuminates why we bother to do so in the first place, and.. the rabbit trail goes on and on. Sometimes with a particular application in mind, viz. technology and humanity; often also for its own sake or for self-development."

That sounds like Ti in the Id block to me. You seem to be good at Ti, you just don't use it for its own sake. The Gamma NT will have a good grasp of systems, but rather than stick to one for consistency they will bastardise the information into a holistic, working model.

But he said he often likes it for its own sake. Will the Id functions be used for their own sake at times?

For IEEs, Si is highly valued. They are the sort of people who may forget to take care of themselves but are greatly appreciative of positive physical sensations. These are the people who always ask for a particular cappuccino at their favourite coffee shop, who enjoy sleeping in from time to time and having someone make them breakfast in bed.

For an LIE it's more... "Oh, I've been working all night, I'm falling asleep. I need caffeine." "What coffee would you like?" "The cheapest one that does the job."

Lol that's funny about LIE. I might not go for the cheapest coffee if I feel like having a specific kind of coffee but the cheapest one works too. Though, staying with the coffee example, I don't actually need to use coffee to keep going if I want to keep going. I'm proud of my ability to not need anything to go on.

So I'm kind of like, I can like Si and then I just don't care about it. I prefer not to care about it a lot of the time because it'd just get in the way. Sometimes I take care of certain basic negative aspects (need food, need sleep, need more comfortable position, need to dress up because it's cold) but not much more than that. Well and I like aesthetics, I'm good with it