Yes, and him being raised by an Fi valuing parent who keeps reminding him of what affects his actions have on others would only make the Fi base person more sensitive and cautious because of the very same feeling of guilt that the action or image of the action produces in the Fi base's mind. LSI, in many ways, feel this guilt too because of their Fi role.Originally Posted by straytk
You and I understand each other very well
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Why are you attributing what Maritsa said to Fi?
She didn't specify she was talking about Fi. She made a comment about a person who she types as EII, that's all.
So "different from what I expect from Fi" doesn't really make sense. How are you matching a specific information elementwith the entire actions of that person? It's not just apples and oranges, it's comparing one component of an abstract concept to the real actions of a person - it's not a simple a jump as you make it to be.
What are you even talking about when you say "Fi would be...."
Fi what?
How are you using Fi?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
RYU,
Fi is a subjective abstraction of feelings based on the feelings/reactions of other individuals. Example.
A. I am an Fi who has been raised by parents who have values that I shouldn't care about others and do only what's right for me...
I would react by not letting the other individuals emotions make a subjective reflection in myself and I would ignore them. A good example of this is my Fi base friend who can step all over people and not care about their sensitivity of emotions. Going so far as to unfriend them, cutting relations, being cold and distant. ECT.
B. I am an Fi who has been raised by parents who have values of not being mean to others and considering their feeling...
I would react by being sensitive to the other person's emotions and sensitive to the feeling of what happens to them, as well as how they react. I am more cautious and I am myself much more emotional. I look like I care much more so than the Fi in example A.
The EII guy I am talking about comes from Fi valuing family, where especially his mom is very much the value instiller who says "don't hurt other's emotions; be careful about the emotions of other." This produced a very sensitive Fi.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Fair enough.
I was raised as a heathen myself.
Well actually, I think that this is more Fe. Fe acts and reacts based on what the other people are feeling. I'm no expert on Fi, but I believe Fi basically boils down to... relational rules. Familiarity and unfamiliarity, friends and enemies, family and strangers, closeness and distance, etc.
Fi is not subjective?
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
To be honest, I don't really put "relational rules" or subjective feelings of others at the top of my list of concerns (not that they're not concerns.. they're just up there with a bunch of things).
This is another point of confusion I have with Socionics. What am I supposed to think about if my main concern is relational rules? I'm coming from MBTI as well, where Fi functions much like Ti, and applies to many fields of interests. While in Socionics, it's just about people.. whether you're Fe or Fi. By this measure, I'm an INTj. I'm not exactly chasing after company. I have other things I think about.
edit: This is too much of a derail probably. Apologies. I care about relational rules at least that much.
Um, Fi is subjective. It's subjective in the way that it creates subjective rules within relationships. I would imagine that Fi knows what keeps people together or attract one another, and what keeps them apart. Fi knows what is appropriate or inappropriate in accordance within a certain subjective distance between people, such as with friends, strangers, enemies, etc.
That's one part of it, but what creates that feeling is Fi resonance.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Yeah, that's what I was getting at. But I don't think that Fi observes emotions or other people and acts on them... in the way that Fe does. So aside from their own reactions to things, Fi doesn't do a whole lot else. That's why Fi types mostly keep things to themselves... "This is what I believe in, and that is enough".
Fi empathizes by reflection of the emotions hence making them subjective to the person and personal and unique to the experiencer. Fe sympathizes which means that those emotions that they are observing are uniquely outside themselves and belong to the other person.
I empathize, I feel the frustration as a reflection of the feeling that exists within myself. I comfort based on this reflection because I am selfish in that I don't want to experience the person being frustrated either. So I would like them to get over that feeling in hopes that this feeling I have within me will go away too. (just an example)
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Ok, well I don't think that empathy is ever "objective", because we use our imagination to estimate what the othe person might be feeling. They are always subjective experiences.
I have no clue exactly how other people experience things, but I would guess that most people empathize in pretty much the same way. So, how is Fi and Fe different? I'm not sure. Maybe that Fi gets "distorted", due to its subjective view of the subject (i.e. friends and enemies). No one has any feelings towards a perceived enemy, for example. This would apply to pretty much anyone... even to Fe. But ideally, Fe has no such "distortions"...
I can see how interacting with discojoe has affected the way you think about relationships.
Rambling some more...
As aforementioned, I'm EII and my partner is LSE. There have been some posts related to the "controlling" nature of the LSE. I find this to be generally accurate. Their control certainly comes from a different place thancontrol, though. It's more like if I don't do what he sees as best to do, he gets irritated. He doesn't order me around by any means. My partner is always saying, "You do what you want." I realize too, that independence and individuality are very important to the Delta quadra as a whole. If I do something that he doesn't understand and it irritates him, he'll sometimes say that. As an EII, as soon as I realize that I've done/said something to upset him, I want to smooth out the misunderstanding. Sometimes though, it's as if he assumes I would do something despite being fully aware that it might irritate him. The last thing he wants is for me to do anything differently just so that he won't get angry. To him, that is being too accommodating. Often I feel like he'd rather be angry and obstinate than admit that he overreacted and have to apologize. Even though they aren't SLEs by any means, it seems that LSEs are loathe to do anything that might "debase" them or cause them to feel "inferior."
I have tried to demonstrate offense in order to get an apology out of him, and sometimes he refuses. I suppose he refuses when he thinks I don't have good reason to be offended - that I'm being "melodramatic and hyper-sensitive." Damn that PoLR
It's very back-and-forth. Sometimes he can lecture to me for hours about business-related things (relationship between control and acting as a teacher). He also complains a lot about people that irritate him; it is easy for him to find something to be irritated by when it comes to interacting with people. But God forbid I want to talk about our relationship. It's so funny. The only way we can talk about that is if he brings it up.
Anyway, he wants me to be independent. He often expresses a desire to see me do things that are more characteristic of his own type: attract attention in group situations, take care of practical tasks (very hard for me!), assert myself, or be the dominant one in bed. This is funny, because I'm sure I've expressed a desire to see him be more understanding, patient, and romantic.
I don't want to be associated with a teddy bear.
You sound kind of like an IEI... idk. It's like as if you're really fascinated by the observation of people. That might be Ni/Dynamic? Or not type related?
And I would say that the quote above is by no means unique to LSEs.
Are you talking about Abbie? Extraverts are usually fascinated in observation of things...they do observe things; that's kinda what they do.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
But teddy bears are cuddly.
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
I'd much prefer if LSE were more like triple chocolate cake. (I think there's no comparison).
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 03-13-2011 at 07:00 AM.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Those are the 8w9 ESTjs, you don't have to listen to Ryu
No I was talking about that Diaphanous person.
And also EIIs aren't usually very melodramatic.
Those are the 8w9 ESTjs, but you always have to listen to Ryu
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I agree with this.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Those are the 8w9 ESTjs, but you always have to listen to Ryu
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
INFjs can be sexy.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
We're terrible at having sex without a real bond or connection. Just terrible at it. When we do, we become so emotional. We can't control our emotions, we feel like we've committed the biggest self disservice.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Yeah, maybe not the right words. I should have said it just feels terrible, emotionally to have sex and the only thing it is is just sex, no bond, no affection, no love...
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I know what you meant.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I found some good words to describe how I feel about this some more.
When I have sex, I'm giving my body away to the person I love. That giving is not a donation..lol...(just trying to be funny), but rather it's me sharing the experience of love through the bond that is created with our physical union. It kinda sucks because if that love and bond is not reciprocated than I can be very sad for a long time, which is why I don't have sex outside of a relationship; a relationship where I know that for me this experience is how the other person feels about sex too. My SLI X's were this way and it made our relationship very special, although on an action level we weren't well matched.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 03-17-2011 at 03:17 PM.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
do delta rationals like bondage? lol
i watched this documentary about a dominatrix house last night and thought most of the ladies seemed SEE or SEI. there was this one guy who stuck in my head because he was a cop who felt bad about going overboard in his aggression with black males and the only way he could cope was by masturbating to the thought of being a slave to the men he was rough with. the psychology of sex is really interesting.
I don't. My SLI X's liked fun play, kind of kinky stuff, but nothing hard core. Of course I don't know what LSE are into. That might come as a shock and a surprise to me when I find out though, I'm sure.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Here's your answer: Rocco Siffredi
Sexuality is a strange thing. I think a lot of it is sort of mentally reinforced by particular experiences, and they just get translated into 'sex'.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
pretty straightforward for me, really. Both of those things are very deep and emotional to me, so I take it very seriously and never casually. I have experimented a little without having sexual intercourse, in my later college years with certain guys that were interested in me but I am not even interested in that. Anyways, what I am looking for is complete and utter trust with someone who has integrity, is very easy to read/straightforward, interested in loyalty not fooling around/playing games or being flirtatious with multiple people at once. I despise romantic/sexual "intrigues" or however socionics literature puts it. It's not glamorous or "fun" to me, and I don't want to be on the receiving end of it. "Players" do not attract me.
I don't need it to happen right away of course, but at heart he should be like that. Then I think I could myself up to him in intimacy, once I have established emotional intimacy and deep and stable trust.
as for bdsm, I am submissive, little, and possibly more or less other things - I really cannot be sure yet - but I am not into humiliation or pain.
Reply With Quote
