Bringing this thread back, but with new stuff.
hey, interesting new stuff
The Vulnerable Function creates feelings of suspicion, loathing, and annoyance when it receives information specific to it, but due to the fact that the Vulnerable Function is a Producing function, it is a way of looking at the world in a critical light.
In essence, the Vulnerable Function is what you think is wrong with the world, or why the world is bad, and works in tandem with the Accepting Role Function, which is self-critical, as Accepting functions view the self in a specific light, which in the Super-Ego block, is what is wrong with you, specifically, and why you are bad.
Where is this from? I can't remember reading this before but I might've just forgotten. I recall stuff about producing/accepting but how is it linked to the dichotomy of self/world?
As for the list, I'll copy/keep the ones here that I relate to:
- ExTp's think the world is bad because people are too concerned with political correctness, politeness, and manners, that people are too sensitive and fragile, instead of being concerned with being insensitive and to-the-point. Ti: Creative >
Vulnerable)
- ISxj's think the world is bad because people are too concerned with possibilities, complex metaphors, and all sides of an issue instead of being concerned with what needs to be done at this very instant, what is realistic, and following the best side of an issue (the one with the most immediate compelling information).
- IxFp's think the world is bad because people are too concerned with gathering knowledge and evidence, being objective and impartial, and because people rely on others' knowledge or second-hand knowledge instead of their own, instead of being concerned with fostering a group atmosphere, sharing emotions, and relating things to personal experience.
This is actually in order of how strongly I relate to them. The IxFp one (Te) isn't really something that truly bothers me. I just sometimes find Te annoying in this way. Too dry, too cold/businesslike in a sense. I mean I can be cold and businesslike but I can also be okay with a bit of Fe going around, I don't ignore it. I don't have a problem with second-hand knowledge if it works. Obviously, simply taking some second-hand data and blindly trying to apply it to the situation without checking if it's logical at all isn't necessarily the best idea. Of course if I don't have time or just don't care - impatience or the issue is simply not really relevant - then I just do that anyway, applying it "blindly".
Now as for the ExTp and the ISxj, interesting conundrum there haha. I'll talk about how I relate to each one. Can you give me your opinion/interpretation about how it all relates to me?
So about the socionics Fi function. I know mine sucks so I relate to the PoLR just fine but I don't know if it's it the world being bad or me being bad. It feels like it's both!
The way I see it, I do wish people wouldn't be so overly concerned with manners and politeness a lot of the time. The world would be so much better without that crap. I don't really often rant about people being too sensitive because I don't easily notice when someone's being too sensitive but yes it does get in the way, without me knowing what exactly got in the way. I don't really even get the idea of how some people would be so fragile. Over time, I've figured out that yes, some people are like that.. it's just inferred though, I really don't have a real concept of it. The whole thing is just unneeded pressure that I prefer to not notice, I'm much better off when I can ignore it. I'm much more myself ignoring all that crap. I used to not even notice at all these societal requirements. When I started noticing, that was no good. I'm re-learning how to ignore it all. Well I'm actually trying to make some basic rules about politeness but I fail to consistently keep even to those really basic rules. Sure these rules all make neat sense but I just can't keep to them. Lol. Idk why it's so hard but my attention is often just not there. When I fail to keep to these simple rules, I'm usually either paying attention to getting to a goal of mine or I'm expressing my own opinion about something. I don't have any attention left to take care of possible politeness issues. Sometimes I have a tiny little bit of cognitive attention left but then I just often feel that I couldn't care less yeah right
Oh and I'm saying I'm better off ignoring because if I'm not careful I can see everything about the world and myself in the world in a negative light about these issues. Luckily that's just a temporary thing.. Does this count as self-criticism? I don't really verbalize criticism towards myself, it's just a really crappy negative feeling. Overall, I loathe issues that people seem to cause, resulting from my behaviours, and the negative feeling that I described.
As for ISxJ PoLR. Yeah I pretty much just ignore the possibilities and I keep telling people that most analogies suck unless *entirely* logical. I relate to following the best side of an issue, love how you put it as "the one with the most immediate compelling information". Yes, that's pretty much it. The thing is, these things don't really bother me, I don't receive it as "special criticism" from other people. I mean I don't like criticism much by default but this kind of criticism isn't any worse than any other kind. Yes I've been criticized for missing the main point but I never care. Well I can get slightly pissed over being criticized and because of that I will feel antagonism readily but otherwise I believe that whoever says that to me, misses *my* point anyway. My point in those kinds of arguments is always about having something together properly in a logical way. I absolutely don't mind shooting down the seemingly random distractions that people claim are an important part of the whole point; to me, those things seem to be just used as illustration or something without fleshing out any actual logical connection. In the worst case, it's even illogical. So overall, I'm not really feeling serious negativity over the existence of this function or over people dealing with whatever possibilities. I would not want to try to cognitively overload myself with that crap as my brain is truly not mapped in a way to do so but I don't feel any pressure to try and do so anyway. I really just don't care most of the time. People who get distracted by possibilities don't bother me either as long as they don't get in my way. Well one exception from this indifference is when Ne-like thinking would be useful to make jokes, for example. I can explicitly - verbally - criticize myself, in private of course, for not always being able to do that. Overall, I loathe the cognitive function itself and sometimes I also hate temporary inability to make up random enough jokes. So sometimes the function could be useful, uh, sure...
Btw I don't relate to the following one but doesn't this have a mix of a bit of MBTI in here?
ENxj's think the world is bad because people are too concerned with being physically and even mentally comfortable, organizing the environment according to what is comfortable instead of what might be useful, and keeping things how they've always been, instead of following present trends to where they lead, taking risks on things that are not 100% certain, and adjusting for the future.
I have never seen Si in socionics being associated with keeping things how they've always been and avoiding risks due to uncertainty. If anything, those people (hated by the ENxj) are much more associated with Ne PoLR and not Si. This is an MBTI contamination here. The rest of your list is pretty cool with the examples, I like them. But this...
The ENxj's dual is actually a Ne PoLR type.
Furthermore, each type's PoLR is specifically geared towards a specific avenue (denoted by the Role Function), which means that a type like the ILI finds suspicion in, loathes, and/or is annoyed by Fe things oriented in an Si way (Too concerned with people's emotions and making people "comfortable"), and a type like the SEE finds suspicion in, loathes, and/or is annoyed by Ti things in an Ne way (Too concerned with complex metaphors, analogies, abstractions embedded in unrealistic theories that can't be applied practically or aren't grounded in reality).
To specify even further, here are the suspicions.
OK I've kept the relevant parts again. Please evaluate together with previous descriptions.
The ESxj here is only a superficial similarity so it's definitely last.
- ExTp's are suspicious of moral values (internally derived), passion, and scruples. ("There is no way they could honestly believe that/follow that")
- ISxj's are suspicious of ambiguity, metaphors/analogies, and what could hypothetically be (as, often, it is unfeasible). ("Why not just worry about what we could do now at this very instant?")
- ESxj's are suspicious of future predictions, idealism, and interpretations of things. ("It's all just wishful thinking, it doesn't reflect reality")
Heh yeah I'm very suspicious of the bullshit that's being taught to people in religions for example. The whole concept of god and all that BS lol. So yeah it doesn't really make sense to me that someone would honestly believe certain ideas. Example, I've always feelt pretty negative about how my sister "seems" to be struggling with her religion. I used quote marks as it might just be in all my mind and maybe she's actually better off believing all that crap but I tend to interpret little things about her in a way that makes me believe it's no good for her. It took me a whole decade to wake up to the insight one day that maybe it's all just in my mind lol. Projection?! Whatever, it's her own problem, she can decide what she wants to do with all that crap. I just feel terrible thinking about it because I probably unconsciously imagine myself in her place. She is very different from me though (probably Fi-lead type) so it's of course irrational assuming it would be the same for her it would be for me. Ok well I hope I managed to explain this well enough. Additionally, I love shooting down moral ideas and frameworks. I have the ultimate moral nihilism. Heh.
Ambiguity? Uh no suspicion, I just go at it full force resolving it, clearing it up. Analogies I'm suspicious of, yes, I tend to refuse to deal with them unless it's all entirely logical and I freely explain this stance of mine to people. Yes, hypothetical possibilities are usually highly unlikely BS. And yeah, I wouldn't worry about them. Low probability means I can just ignore it, unless it's extremely important to avoid the possibility.
As for future predictions, it depends on likelihood actually. Idealism can be okay.. depending.
I certainly don't want wishful thinking though. I think overall I'm not really suspicious of these things so I should delete the ESxj from this list, I'm only keeping it for some extra datapoint..
[*]ENxj's are suspicious of following the past, traditions (whether societal or individual), and taking it easy. ("Just because it has worked before doesn't mean it works good or can't work better.")
Again seems like you mixed in too much MBTI Si... :/
Further information:
Lead Function - Why you are good.
Creative Function - Why the world is good.
I don't really understand this one. I can't link any function to "why I'm good". The world is good well because it exists.
Role Function - Why you are flawed/bad.
Vulnerable Function - Why the world is flawed/bad.
Here I could be relating to Fi Role and Ne PoLR but I'm not sure. I think the world would be better off without the Fi too. I'm not really bad because of not having Fi, it's just a reaction to issues. I'm certainly not bad for not having Ne, though.
Suggestive Function - What you need more of.
Mobilizing Function -What the world needs more of.
Idk, I could swap Ni/Fe around just fine, works either way. Depends on my interpretation. Can you give examples on these?
Ignoring Function - What you find boring. (Still under thought-construction)
Demonstrative Function - What the world has enough of/What the world finds boring./Why the world is boring (Still under thought-construction)
Both Te and Si are boring for me so that's not really a good distinction IMO... I can't interpret the Demonstrative one.
A) The Lead Function - That which you are best at and are always (for the most part) absorbed in. You are typically going to be using this function for the majority of your life, though you may actually not be able to pin-point it exactly due to the fact that you are so good at using the Lead function that tasks and things related to it seem entirely natural and regular.
Sure...
The Creative Function - That which you relay others the work and perspective of your lead function. This is how you relate your lead function to others and what you use to engage the environment primarily. It is focused on the world rather than the self, and is usually seen as a means to an end (it isn't revered so much like the Lead, think of it like a tool). Therefore, your primary focus for engaging this function is merely using it as a medium through which to spread your findings and thinking from your Lead Function.
Yeah I like to kill people with my Ti...
Though, Se as well
The Role Function - That which is your character flaw and downfall as a person. This function, when activated, siphons you off from your powerful Lead function through which you rely on and forces you to at least recognize it or face somewhat humiliating self-criticism. This function can be represented by the phrase "I am bad if I... [don't/fail to/neglect this]" (stolen from some Socion website I'll find later of the First 4 IM Elements of Model A). There is variation between how certain people deal with the Role Function however, which can range from compulsive attention to it when it arises to downright neglect. Any attempts to actually succeed at this function are short-lasted, as you will eventually return to your dominant perspective, deactivating this function.
I can attempt attention to this in the case of Fi only because I really don't care about Ne.
The Vulnerable Function - That which is loathed, abhorred, neglected, and completely ignored. Any criticism received to this area is taken with surprise and sting, as it is baffling that others even care or realize the implications of this function. This function is the way your Role Function relates to others and the world. This also usually represents the portion of society or humanity that you typically loathe (with regard to Role-Vulnerable mechanism, i.e. INFp's loathe Si in a Te way). Suspicions surround the information geared toward this function.
I loathe Fi. A lot of suspicions too as detailed above. Criticism is taken with a lot of sting, yes. It's also very baffling, yes. But you were saying that the world is bad with this function, not the person himself/herself. So why is criticism taken so badly?
I don't really loathe Ne (=possibility generating) in other people. I just don't care. Really baffling too, feels cognitively unpleasant, so I don't try to mess around with it too much. In one ear, out the other ear. Well sometimes it could be useful actually but I can't really call this shit up at will.
The Suggestive Function - That which is desired, complementary, and welcomed. Where suspicions surround the information of the Vulnerable function, gullibility is a key feature of the Suggestive Function, as you tend to naturally be too trusting of its information, sense it complements the Dominant perspective and the fact that it is a relatively absent and weak function in a sociotype. In a phrase, this is "What you need more of" to succeed. (IxI's, for instance, need Se information and tasks to motivate them, meaning that the presence of any Se at all will generally be enough to motivate them to do something, though their own motivation is hard for them to produce on their own)
Actually I'm not trusting of either Ni or Fe that terribly much. Sometimes, maybe, either Ni or Fe, doesn't seem to make a difference.
The Mobilizing Function - That which "The World needs more of", that which is dear, lovable, and innocent (in a child-like sense). Unlike the Suggestive Function, which can't be produced on its own in the sociotype, this function inflates (just like the tertiary function) in the sociotype so that he or she may provide the world with that which he or she finds dear, lovable, and innocent. Unfortunately, you are typically going to be rather bad at it, and its inflation will make you look rather "pathetic" as Gainan refers to in what he calls the "Pathetic Hidden Agenda". Usually one assumes great confidence in this function despite being terrible at it (leading to Mobilizing-Lead confusion for mistyping). You specifically do not typically recognize that you are terrible at it though, but others will undoubtedly recognize your lack of ability in it along with your sense of superiority regarding this function. An example might be an ILE claiming that he is absurdly superior at comforting people, being a warm and kind person, being a "people-person" and other Fe-related traits, but actually being rather socially-awkward and tactless when it comes to dealing with emotions and people's feelings. This function is held dear, and it is thought that the world needs more of it.
I figured out a long time ago that I'm probably crap at Fe but maybe I forget that when I'm feeling good enough. :/
Are you sure that Ni when it's suggestive function cannot be produced at all? Not even with a lot of outside source usage? I would say I sometimes have some vague Ni stuff, I prefer to keep it to myself though. If I can make sense of it by Ti then I'm happy to share the understanding.
Ignoring Function - that which is obvious, trite, and unnecessary. Typically, the only time you will see this function is in a "I can do that too" kind of way. When others use this IM Element, you instinctively tend to attempt to show them that you can do it just as well as they can, but don't typically care for it or use it often. Any information received through here is taken as "obvious and unnecessary", as you are adept in it but don't think it is the right way to deal with things (instead choosing to deal with things through the Lead Perspective).
Fits Si or Te.
Demonstrative Function - that which is more-so obvious than the ignoring function and what forms a major portion of your worldview, yet is cast aside as boring or dull when you are with others. This function is sort of like something you enjoy but don't want others to know that you actually somewhat enjoy, thus it often remains in your private life. It is typically going to be as strong as the Lead function or possibly stronger (it is also different in that where the Lead Function is your strongest Accepting function, your Demonstrative function is your strongest producing function, meaning that you will be able to use it somewhat better than those who have this function as their Creative Function, i.e. IEI's Fi might be stronger than IEE's Fi). You will also engage this function when bored, and use it as another means to express your Lead function through a different form.
Uhhm that fits Te only, no way it fits Si. Te has a lot of influence, definitely.
EDIT: The Suggestive function is something you want to get better at because you love its presence sub-consciously. The Vulnerable function is something you want to get better at because you don't want to be as bad as you are with it, so that others won't critique it.
Uhmm, so one actually wants to try and get better at their PoLR? Not ignoring it completely after all? Not trying see the world as bad instead of self? Wow, so much conflicting information about this elusive PoLR ;P (I'm not just talking about you right now, a lot of these ideas on the PoLR have been floating around...)
So I'll stop thinking about this topic right now. If you analyse this then do let me know if you see it as more SLE or more LSI.
, is a static function, meaning that it provides the "Ah-ha" moment for static ideas. Like explaining to them how an engine works. You have to wait for it to all click as they look at it from several different angles mentally, and they just immediately understand how an engine works. They see all of the different parts of the engine in their mind, and they see how they each move to create the whole. This is a static construction. They see hypothetical properties of hypothetical things (Ne) and see how it might work in the dynamics of the environment (Si). This is Ne/Si axis
, is a dynamic function, meaning that it provides the "Ah-ha" moment for dynamic situations and ideas. They will see physical properties of things in the immediate present (Se) and interpret it in the larger scale of things that is hypothetically happening around them (Ni). Seeing a dent on the right side of a car, for instance, can be derived to mean that the car was hit turning left, meaning that the fault was probably the driver's judgement abilities of the car's relative speed coming straight and his window to turn left. Furthermore, it can then be derived that if the person is sensible, then he will most likely be much more cautious when turning left on intersections. Ni weaves a perception for that which has a physical manifestation, explaining it, and explaining what that property will lead to. This is why Ni users are said to be able to grasp at patterns that others can't see (and why they are often denoted as natural strategists), because they are immersed in the immaterial, dynamic patterns that can give them an advantage of seeing what comes next. Thus, they are immersed in these patterns
axis.
doesn't start at Ring 0, nobody seems to have a kernel
in Socionics is associated with stability and comfort, as stability is comforting. All you'll see for wikisocion definitions is describing Si as lazy and overly concerned with comfort, but that is not the case, as the Creative function provides a means to organize the environment proactively in the interest of keeping stability with efficiency and a smooth running system, as that is comforting to the SLI 
) or maintaining stability with an emotionally stable atmosphere and allowing others to efficiently get what they need from your environment comfortably, as that is comforting to the SEI 
). 
