an aspect of ENxj/ISxj interactions from a Gamma perspective

[Joy]

From a recent PM...

Se/Ni interactions are one of the easiest things in Socionics for me to see, but one of most difficult things to explain.

Hmmmm...

ESFps seem to tease less. When they're playful, it's in a lighter, more energetic and open way. They're much more direct, too.

ISxjs seem to tease more, often by challenging something you've said or done, sometimes to the point of nitpicking. They try to drag you into a debate or a challenging exchange of sorts. It's not all that serious though, depending on the subject matter and the individuals involved. The way they act appears to be challenge-seeking (rather than malicious). I think that's part of the reason they seem so critical to most people... they're just trying to find out if you're strong enough or interesting enough or smart enough to respond a certain way.

In Beta this takes the form of arguments. In Gamma this takes the form of mutual criticism that's intended to be useful (instead of drama), though I think it's more for stimulation between ENTjs and ISFjs than it is between ESFps and INTps, who just say it because that's just what they think. (I think they stimulate each other with Fi and Te instead of Ni and Se, which would make sense with my theory/observation/understanding that the 2nd/6th functions give a relationship energy and the 1st/5th functions give it stability.)

I'm still thinking this over. Just thought I'd post it for feedback.

[FDG]

This perspective of relationships as game-playing is getting boring. Strong enough? Interesting enough? People needing to "test" others? Wtf? And I'm the one having a Fi PoLR?

[discojoe]

I tease out of pure sadism.

[Joy]

This perspective of relationships as game-playing is getting boring. Strong enough? Interesting enough? People needing to "test" others? Wtf? And I'm the one having a Fi PoLR?

The desire/need for a strong/stimulating partner is a hallmark of Ni/Se relationships.

And none of what I wrote negates the presence of strong Fi in ESI's. It's just fucking around when it's teasing. When it's criticism, it's out of concern for something that's important to both partners, generally. Sometimes it sounds like the two are combined. When this happens, either teasing is made to sound like criticism, or teasing is added to criticism.

If a potential partner responds well to the teasing in the beginning, it means (s)he will respond well to the criticism that will be a part of their daily lives if they are to share their lives with the Se creative, particularly an ESI. I don't think anyone who knows an ESI well (or even casually, in most cases) would ever seriously suggest that the ESI doesn't have a tendency to be critical.

i think ISFjs "tease" just for the sake of moral correction of the person as opposed to just seeking a thrill.

It's not about thrill seeking, it's about stimulation and confidence in a partner's strength. And while an ESI's morals are important to him/her, (s)he doesn't just go around teasing (or even criticizing) people for poor morals or moral decisions all the time... especially not their dual. (According to my understanding and observations, there may be debates with their duals about things related to the ESI's morals, but that generally occurs when the ESI tries to make something sound like Ti when there are really Fi reasons behind it, and that eventually comes out in the conversation. That is something that I'm not 100% confident applies to every ESI and his/her dual though.)

[discojoe]

A lot of my antagonism is due simply to ADD.

[Joy]

I wasn't talking about you in particular... though come to think of it, most of the people and examples I was thinking of probably have ADD. Regardless, it works with the theory, even if some Se creatives are more like that than others.

[Creepy-bg]

you think everybody has ADD

[Joy]

No... just most of the people I've been friends with. I'd rather not get into this topic of discussion here though.

[Expat]

And while an ESI's morals are important to him/her, (s)he doesn't just go around teasing (or even criticizing) people for poor morals or moral decisions all the time... especially not their dual. (According to my understanding and observations, there may be debates with their duals about things related to the ESI's morals, but that generally occurs when the ESI tries to make something sound like Ti when there are really Fi reasons behind it, and that eventually comes out in the conversation. That is something that I'm not 100% confident applies to every ESI and his/her dual though.)

I think it does apply to ESIs generally, and that's what I meant in the Ti role bit in the ESI description in the wiki.

It's something I can't quite explain - the ESI will back up a decision, or an opinion, with pseudo-Ti reasoning. The LIE will notice flaws in the Ti reasoning, and point them out; the ESI gets increasingly impatient, thinking the LIE is attempting to change the ESI's mind, which is not necessarily the LIE's goal; when if the ESI had revealed the Fi reasons to begin with, that would have been much more effective.

[Joy]

Yes. Keep in mind though that use of the 3rd function is a request for one's 5th function. If they're acting Ti, what they need is Te. The use of Ti isn't any more pleasant for them than the use of Fe is for us.

However... While I believe the 3rd/5th thing to be true theoretically and have observed this, I've noticed though that Ni is important, too. It's not enough just to explain things with Te... it takes a bit of Ni to allow timely escape from the Ti loop their stuck in.

[Minde]

And while an ESI's morals are important to him/her, (s)he doesn't just go around teasing (or even criticizing) people for poor morals or moral decisions all the time... especially not their dual. (According to my understanding and observations, there may be debates with their duals about things related to the ESI's morals, but that generally occurs when the ESI tries to make something sound like Ti when there are really Fi reasons behind it, and that eventually comes out in the conversation. That is something that I'm not 100% confident applies to every ESI and his/her dual though.)

I think it does apply to ESIs generally, and that's what I meant in the Ti role bit in the ESI description in the wiki.

It's something I can't quite explain - the ESI will back up a decision, or an opinion, with pseudo-Ti reasoning. The LIE will notice flaws in the Ti reasoning, and point them out; the ESI gets increasingly impatient, thinking the LIE is attempting to change the ESI's mind, which is not necessarily the LIE's goal; when if the ESI had revealed the Fi reasons to begin with, that would have been much more effective.

For example...?

Also, would this be a problem of both ExIs or just ESIs?

[Expat]

For example...?

Also, would this be a problem of both ExIs or just ESIs?

I wouldn't call it necessarily a "problem", it depends on the perspective.

I have examples for both ESI and EII, which are a bit personal.

[Expat]

Yes. Keep in mind though that use of the 3rd function is a request for one's 5th function. If they're acting Ti, what they need is Te. The use of Ti isn't any more pleasant for them than the use of Fe is for us.

Can you give an example of how "Ti requesting the use of Te" would work?

[FDG]

Yes. Keep in mind though that use of the 3rd function is a request for one's 5th function. If they're acting Ti, what they need is Te. The use of Ti isn't any more pleasant for them than the use of Fe is for us.

Can you give an example of how "Ti requesting the use of Te" would work?

Like...when even a smart IxFj sometimes is getting through a math proof by single strict logical steps and spending lots of time doing it, whereas a more efficient trick would render the whole operation much faster (Te+Ni?)

[Minde]

For example...?

Also, would this be a problem of both ExIs or just ESIs?

I wouldn't call it necessarily a "problem", it depends on the perspective.

I have examples for both ESI and EII, which are a bit personal.

Ok, that's fine, then. I just wanted to know what the difference between Ti-reasoning and Fi-reasoning would look like, from your perspective. I mean, for myself, there are times when I know something is true, but when I try to explain myself using normal logic it ends up not making sense. I try doing it like that because I think to myself, "Why would anyone believe me if I can't make it make sense?" I'm not sure if that's the type of thing you are referring to, though.