infinite
New member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2014
- Messages
- 565
- MBTI Type
- ISTP
- Enneagram
- ~8
- Instinctual Variant
- sx/sp
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.