Mea Se? Ne?

[Mea]

I've been wondering for awhile. If I have an Se role or am I Se dominant.

I'm pretty confused because I have friends suggesting ESFp, INFj, ISFj, ENFp, INTp, ISTp.

Though I feel most comfortable with ENFp, it has caused me to also consider ESFp. The others I feel are less likely, especially the rational types. I'm curious about what the forum thinks. Hopefully I'll see some results despite me not being as active as certain members.

I pretty much doubt I'm beta, though I think the NF club fits me very well.

One thing friends say about me is that I dislike being told what to do, that I'd much rather tell people what to do. But my opinion is that... Yes. I hate people ordering me around, however, at work, when I'm getting others to do what I want, I do not make it so obvious. It's kinda like I ask them their opinion, and I judge how close we are. And I tell them what to do that I think is the best for their role.

I'm not sure what this points to. Questions are welcome.

[Ezra]

As Joy has emphasised so many times, you must always in this situation apply the Te/Fi or Fe/Ti, Se/Ni or Ne/Si preference. You can't just say "it's between SEE and IEE", because they are two very different types. If you disagree, talk to imfd95, and I'm sure he'd agree with you. But I'm not interested in his subtype theorising. I'm interested in classical socionics, which dictates that SEE is close to ESI, and IEE is close to EII. Why? Because of quadra values. So look at the values, and look at what you value. Then you will find your type.

Thus far, you have decided that Beta is unlikely. Why is this? Because you do not value Se? If so, cut out SEE or ESI as considerations. Is it because you devalue Fe? Well, judging from what types you are considering as possibilities, this is likely. With the exception of the last two (SLI and ILI), all those types have Fi in the ego. Do you think you value Fi, and are you strong in it?

Second, you think NF club is likely. Since you appear to value Fi from the considerations made by yourself and others, the two types that would correlate best with these two premises are EII and IEE. In this way, you have Fi in the ego, and both are members of the NF club. However, on top of this, you have to consider the question of whether you value Ne/Si or Se/Ni. If it is the former, there should be no problem; it really should be a case of IEE or EII (in essence, the quadra values, functions and club fit). If it is the latter, you have to reconsider your priorities. Is there a possibility that you're not a member of the NF club? If so, how likely is it that you're not? And on what priority do you place club?

By the way, where did you and Thunder get your little virtual reality pictures from?

[XoX]

I've been wondering for awhile. If I have an Se role or am I Se dominant.

I'm pretty confused because I have friends suggesting ESFp, INFj, ISFj, ENFp, INTp, ISTp.

Though I feel most comfortable with ENFp, it has caused me to also consider ESFp. The others I feel are less likely, especially the rational types. I'm curious about what the forum thinks. Hopefully I'll see some results despite me not being as active as certain members.

I pretty much doubt I'm beta, though I think the NF club fits me very well.

One thing friends say about me is that I dislike being told what to do, that I'd much rather tell people what to do. But my opinion is that... Yes. I hate people ordering me around, however, at work, when I'm getting others to do what I want, I do not make it so obvious. It's kinda like I ask them their opinion, and I judge how close we are. And I tell them what to do that I think is the best for their role.

I'm not sure what this points to. Questions are welcome.

Your vocabulary is Ne > Se. You are never definite in your statements. "less likely", "pretty much doubt", ... you always leave room for alternative interpretations. You are curious about what all the possible alternative interpretations are. NeNeNe.

Do you (more or less) relate to this:

as a role (3rd) function

The individual tends to criticize himself for being less disciplined and organized than he should be, and typically tries to improve himself in this area, with very limited success. He is almost unable to make himself (or anyone else, for that matter) do things that they do not want to do, and is more likely to abandon a situation where people don't want to do anything rather than figure out how to mobilize or organize them properly.

Discipline, organization, and mobilization can occur on their own, though, when there is a situation that demands it (as opposed to trying to generate it by oneself). However, he grows increasingly tired and emotionally worn out from having to put up a fight, and begins to look for a different, easier route rather than continue to confront the challenge directly.

He resents any attempts to "push" him to do things and rejects the idea of people pressuring each other to do things. He himself avoids the use of pressure, preferring instead to entice and inspire. Only severe irritation can make him become forceful and demanding for brief periods of time until he calms down.

[Mea]

Your vocabulary is Ne > Se. You are never definite in your statements. "less likely", "pretty much doubt", ... you always leave room for alternative interpretations. You are curious about what all the possible alternative interpretations are. NeNeNe.

Can't disagree.

Do you (more or less) relate to this:

as a role (3rd) function

The individual tends to criticize himself for being less disciplined and organized than he should be, and typically tries to improve himself in this area, with very limited success. He is almost unable to make himself (or anyone else, for that matter) do things that they do not want to do, and is more likely to abandon a situation where people don't want to do anything rather than figure out how to mobilize or organize them properly.

Discipline, organization, and mobilization can occur on their own, though, when there is a situation that demands it (as opposed to trying to generate it by oneself). However, he grows increasingly tired and emotionally worn out from having to put up a fight, and begins to look for a different, easier route rather than continue to confront the challenge directly.

He resents any attempts to "push" him to do things and rejects the idea of people pressuring each other to do things. He himself avoids the use of pressure, preferring instead to entice and inspire. Only severe irritation can make him become forceful and demanding for brief periods of time until he calms down.

Hmm. I do relate to this. but also a lil of filatova's description of Se in an SEE. Perhaps less so as a whole.

Se: The Strong individual. Irrepressibly he approaches his goals and, at any costs, tries to reach them. “Only success, only victory!”

SEE – always the leader, ambitious and confident. Naturally proves to be the center of attention in any group. The desire, without fail, to lead, to control; leads to rivalries, competition with other aspirants. However, SEE deftly senses the nuances in his relations, wonderfully senses the moods of others towards him. If someone, whom he must deal with, is capable of holding him at a distance, of resisting him, SEE will not bother with him, but if, and when, he feels slack he can press and become unceremonious. Will not seek conflict without reason. Can act diplomatic and insinuating in order to achieve objectives. But if conflict arises he can express himself directly, unambiguously.

Always, and in everything, SEE tries to display his advantages to others. Should he suffer injustice he will find a way to turn it around, presenting himself to others so as not to lose face, even conversely to appear the victor. He never acknowledges his injuries.

SEE tends not to get lost in the difficult situation; in such cases he rather reacts with more strength, mobilizing to surmount the difficulty.

Energetic and noisy, he creates the impression that he is occupying as much space as possible.

SEE noticeably develops the shadow function of the extroverted sense of sensations (Se), especially when viewed from the exterior. SEE loves bright, garish clothing; he prefers to appear from “better to extravagant” rather than “everyday and gray”. It pleases him to be noticed, to garner the attention of others.

The parts highlighted red are the parts I relate to most. But I'd like to see what an Se role is like. I think Gilly has talked about that a few times. And I'm curious if others with Se role relate to that at all, especially those producing sub-types.


Probably it's because of my sub-type that caused this doubt.

[Mea]

SLI? Umm. Is there an explanation? Or was that a joke vote?

[snegledmaca]

Well if you are then you are aware of you environment. Stuff like sights, sounds, objects, territory and so on. Are you? For example, are you good at computer games that require you to notice your adversary immediately and to act immediately as well? (This is something I've noticed dominants are really good at. First person shooters and stuff like that)

[XoX]

Your vocabulary is Ne > Se. You are never definite in your statements. "less likely", "pretty much doubt", ... you always leave room for alternative interpretations. You are curious about what all the possible alternative interpretations are. NeNeNe.

Can't disagree.

The question is do you do this because in your mind you see too many possibilities and are uncertain of which path of thought is the right one or because you are a natural politician and you wish to keep things ambiguous? It is easier to change your mind if you need this way.

[XoX]

Well if you are then you are aware of you environment. Stuff like sights, sounds, objects, territory and so on. Are you? For example, are you good at computer games that require you to notice your adversary immediately and to act immediately as well? (This is something I've noticed dominants are really good at. First person shooters and stuff like that)

If this is the criteria then I'm too. Because I pwnzor in fps games (well I used to when I was younger and actually played them). I'm also generally aware of my environment. However my hand-eye coordination / fine motorics could be better and I tend to lose objects all the time. Like forget where I put them. I think sensors are good with that kind of stuff.

[snegledmaca]

Well, there is no need to focus on a single aspect of it. You could just be good at it.

From my experiences type notice stuff. Really good. I for example such at this really bad. People constantly complain to me how I never say hi and ignore and walk past them. The truth is that I never noticed them in the first place to ignore them (It's funny how types, especially SLE-s respond, they step in my way and block my path. It's how all people should behave if they are bothered by me not noticing them. I hate it when they just complain and expect me to change and when I don't judge me). Do you notice stuff really, really good XoX?

[snegledmaca]

then why are INp's typically more oblivious to their environments than INj's? (ime and given the comments i've seen here.)

i think Se types are tuned into specific features of the environment.

Is this addressed towards me?

[snegledmaca]

Well according to the model INp-s is as weak as that of INj-s. Experientially even more so because it's unconscious so that causes further weakening. And also because it's a need being helpless in it attracts their dual or activity so they would also actively express helplessness in it adding to the appearance of it being even weaker.

[snegledmaca]

Why? It is valued but needed. They don't want to be good at it they want people around them to be good at it. To complement them. I mean, think of a person's psyche developing. Why would it waste incredible time and effort into things with little to no payback when there are areas where there is significant payback like the ego block? And also the areas are unconscious meaning there is no direct control over it. Overcoming that would require incredible effort as well. Having a complement to take on those duties instead of you is far more efficient.

[XoX]

Well, there is no need to focus on a single aspect of it. You could just be good at it.

From my experiences type notice stuff. Really good. I for example such at this really bad. People constantly complain to me how I never say hi and ignore and walk past them. The truth is that I never noticed them in the first place to ignore them (It's funny how types, especially SLE-s respond, they step in my way and block my path. It's how all people should behave if they are bothered by me not noticing them. I hate it when they just complain and expect me to change and when I don't judge me). Do you notice stuff really, really good XoX?

I can't compare myself objectively to other people so I don't know if I notice stuff "really, really good". I doubt I do but I notice a lot. However it seems I mostly notice "interesting stuff" and not notice "uninteresting stuff". For example when driving a car..I often fail to notice the signs which tell me how fast I should drive. At the same time I notice that the car far behind me has a weird and exotic license plate. Anyways when I'm playing FPS I tend to notice quite a lot because a lot of interesting stuff happens around me. I can also effectively playback the interesting images later on. I would think Se people and sensory people in general notice all the details about everything not just about interesting things.

[FDG]

Dynamics notice better things in movement, wheras static notice better objects that are fixed. Except from this, everything else is an entirely personal quality.

[snegledmaca]

I can't compare myself objectively to other people so I don't know if I notice stuff "really, really good". I doubt I do but I notice a lot. However it seems I mostly notice "interesting stuff" and not notice "uninteresting stuff". For example when driving a car..I often fail to notice the signs which tell me how fast I should drive. At the same time I notice that the car far behind me has a weird and exotic license plate. Anyways when I'm playing FPS I tend to notice quite a lot because a lot of interesting stuff happens around me. I can also effectively playback the interesting images later on.

I for example get tunnel vision and miss on a lot going on around me. And my reaction time is bad. I too notice interesting stuff, I'm sure all people do. I guess it's more a question of what one finds "interesting". For example, I wouldn't notice the license plate, or even a guy dressed up as a cabaret dancer walking in front of me, but I would notice a similarity in mannerisms and appearance of somebody I'm only observing by a passing glance with someone I know (care about).

I would think Se people and sensory people in general notice all the details about everything not just about interesting things.

That sound like an incredible waste of time. I doubt any type notices all the things through their dominant element. I think they notice relevant things, perception is optimal rather then all encompassing.

[Mea]

Dynamics notice better things in movement, wheras static notice better objects that are fixed. Except from this, everything else is an entirely personal quality.

Umm. What do you mean? Any examples?

[Mea]

Your vocabulary is Ne > Se. You are never definite in your statements. "less likely", "pretty much doubt", ... you always leave room for alternative interpretations. You are curious about what all the possible alternative interpretations are. NeNeNe.

Can't disagree.

The question is do you do this because in your mind you see too many possibilities and are uncertain of which path of thought is the right one or because you are a natural politician and you wish to keep things ambiguous? It is easier to change your mind if you need this way.

The problem is, I'm afraid that I might have convinced myself of being Ne and seeing too many possibilities. I do still think Ne > Se, though I'm kinda curious how I come across over the internet.

But looking at the reinin dichotomies, I think ENFp is most likely. At least I don't think I'm a positivist.

Well if you are then you are aware of you environment. Stuff like sights, sounds, objects, territory and so on. Are you? For example, are you good at computer games that require you to notice your adversary immediately and to act immediately as well? (This is something I've noticed dominants are really good at. First person shooters and stuff like that)

Ha. I'm not sure. I was good at counterstrike mainly because of accuracy and knowing what to do in clan matches. I think my reaction is pretty slow. I think noticing my enemies was something I got used to. I'm not sure how to answer this question.

[snegledmaca]

but your dual isn't always around. and complete depedence is compromising. especially if you find yourself in environments with more Se as is more likely with beta/gamma values.

I'm not following you here. What are you trying to say?

also being around people of strong and valued Se, might you learn some things from them? (the last two points are less true for INj in comparison)

Well, hmm, I think that would depend on whether you are cable of that. Of learning through observation. I mean, we are capable of that, but in case of a given position in the psyche perhaps the obstacle in the path of using it prevent us from employing others methods, copying others usage of the element.

And also the areas are unconscious meaning there is no direct control over it. Overcoming that would require incredible effort as well.

hidden agenda is weak + unconscious but one frequently invests effort into it according to many interpretations.

I've recently been thinking that these interpretations are not true. I have not observed anything like that. To be honest right now it seems like theoretical speculation to me. I think the description activation function is more accurate. When other people give you this is activates you.

of course hidden agenda is a creative function too. and homoverted. and dual-seeking is not. so i'm not trying to draw a 1:1 comparison here. dual-seeking function is more depedent. just saying being weak+unconscious doesn't necessarily mean complete dependence.

I never meant dependence but incompetence in it's realization. To the point where dependence is a viable alternative.

Well if you are then you are aware of you environment. Stuff like sights, sounds, objects, territory and so on. Are you? For example, are you good at computer games that require you to notice your adversary immediately and to act immediately as well? (This is something I've noticed dominants are really good at. First person shooters and stuff like that)

Ha. I'm not sure. I was good at counterstrike mainly because of accuracy and knowing what to do in clan matches. I think my reaction is pretty slow. I think noticing my enemies was something I got used to. I'm not sure how to answer this question.

Well, were you revered as the main component in advantage acquiring? Revered for you abilities? If you were that would point towards developed sensing. Imo.

[XoX]

I can't compare myself objectively to other people so I don't know if I notice stuff "really, really good". I doubt I do but I notice a lot. However it seems I mostly notice "interesting stuff" and not notice "uninteresting stuff". For example when driving a car..I often fail to notice the signs which tell me how fast I should drive. At the same time I notice that the car far behind me has a weird and exotic license plate. Anyways when I'm playing FPS I tend to notice quite a lot because a lot of interesting stuff happens around me. I can also effectively playback the interesting images later on.

I for example get tunnel vision and miss on a lot going on around me. And my reaction time is bad. I too notice interesting stuff, I'm sure all people do. I guess it's more a question of what one finds "interesting". For example, I wouldn't notice the license plate, or even a guy dressed up as a cabaret dancer walking in front of me, but I would notice a similarity in mannerisms and appearance of somebody I'm only observing by a passing glance with someone I know (care about).

I think we are a bit different. So I now try to watch some tv. Let's see what I notice...

- the guy in the red semi-tight shirt has an overgrown "short" hair
- the other foreign looking guy, who surprisingly speaks fluent Finnish, has quite wide shoulders for a small guy. He also has a bit messy hair even if that certainly has not been the purpose judging from how he keeps his hair
- the female with eye glasses looks like a pony in her hair, hah, kinda sexy. she has a weird ball shaped neclace. she is kinda big even if not fat. big boned? very inflexible back
- now two kids and a mom appear on the screen, one kid has orange shirt with a white t-rex on it who is moving forward but looking behind...i didn't know t-rexes do that kind of stuff...
- now a very serious woman appears who has extremely weird shirt and a sort of manly suit. the inflexible big boned lady with glasses seems to agree with everything she says.
- in the audience people are very quiet. most people seem very average but one of the people is a sort of 50 year old hippie guy...how strange...who invited him there, heh, he has different profile from other people there...
- the big boned lady with glasses and pony hair has big boooooobs...and wide shoulders. the foreign looking guy who speaks fluent finnish has not shaven his mustache this morning...starting to look a bit unclean...normally I wouldnt care but this guy clearly wants to look smooth...but have messed his hair and haven't shaved the mustache
- a bald guy looks bored...only women are speaking...now the bald guy speaks...he has shaven his head just this morning...it is very clean...he has strong chin and ape like eyes. He stops talking and looks bored again.
- now the hippie talks...angrily...his shirt looks like banana liquorice. he defends some factory..I just notice i didn't even listen to what they are talking about...some factory is being closed and they are discussing the ethics and practicalities involved...I just want to see the pony girl's booooobs one more time...the liquorice shirted hippie is clearly a leftist factory activist...that explains his precence...the women in suit is some manager apparently..i wonder what the pony girl does in the factory.

umm...I think I stop now...I notice this kind of details..what does it mean? nothing?

[snegledmaca]

I'm not following you here. What are you trying to say?

consider observations like this:

INTps would want to go power driven, moneymaking, sometimes risky places, whereas INTjs would prefer a happy, cheerful and exciting surrounding.

okay so maybe not all INTp's and INTj's are completely like that. but you would seldom see such an observation made the other way around. INj's are more likely to avoid places with a lot of Se. they aren't strong at it, they don't value it, and they don't value anything that would typically be complemented by Se. where as INp's typically do more so. hence you figure they are on average more likely to be in proximity to Se, less likely to be able to say, just avoid it altogether.

I don't understand, why are you saying this?

it seems more likely for an INp to have at least a chance of developing the Se it somewhat.

But you are lessening the impact of it being unconscious. There is no direct control over the development of the usage of the element. The pace of the progress is not dictated and you have to work around obstacles instead of approaching them head on like you would with a conscious element. An INj can choose to avoid aspects of reality, an INp-s cannot. It will hit them out of nowhere, unprepared and they will need the assistance of types.

how could partial duals work at all if they keep pulling each other into each other's quadras without having their POLR's taken care of? i would think each other's HA's help them out with their POLR's somewhat.

Well, it's a conscious element. They will merely ignore the PoLR aspects of reality. If nobody puts pressure on it things should be ok imo. I don't know. I'm not fully understanding you here.

[snegledmaca]

I think we are a bit different. So I now try to watch some tv. Let's see what I notice...

- the guy in the red semi-tight shirt has an overgrown "short" hair
- the other foreign looking guy, who surprisingly speaks fluent Finnish, has quite wide shoulders for a small guy. He also has a bit messy hair even if that certainly has not been the purpose judging from how he keeps his hair
- the female with eye glasses looks like a pony in her hair, hah, kinda sexy. she has a weird ball shaped neclace. she is kinda big even if not fat. big boned? very inflexible back
- now two kids and a mom appear on the screen, one kid has orange shirt with a white t-rex on it who is moving forward but looking behind...i didn't know t-rexes do that kind of stuff...
- now a very serious woman appears who has extremely weird shirt and a sort of manly suit. the inflexible big boned lady with glasses seems to agree with everything she says.
- in the audience people are very quiet. most people seem very average but one of the people is a sort of 50 year old hippie guy...how strange...who invited him there, heh, he has different profile from other people there...
- the big boned lady with glasses and pony hair has big boooooobs...and wide shoulders. the foreign looking guy who speaks fluent finnish has not shaven his mustache this morning...starting to look a bit unclean...normally I wouldnt care but this guy clearly wants to look smooth...but have messed his hair and haven't shaved the mustache
- a bald guy looks bored...only women are speaking...now the bald guy speaks...he has shaven his head just this morning...it is very clean...he has strong chin and ape like eyes. He stops talking and looks bored again.
- now the hippie talks...angrily...his shirt looks like banana liquorice. he defends some factory..I just notice i didn't even listen to what they are talking about...some factory is being closed and they are discussing the ethics and practicalities involved...I just want to see the pony girl's booooobs one more time...the liquorice shirted hippie is clearly a leftist factory activist...that explains his precence...the women in suit is some manager apparently..i wonder what the pony girl does in the factory.

umm...I think I stop now...I notice this kind of details..what does it mean? nothing?

Depends on whether you are trying to notice these things or if it is natural.

Hmm, you appear to be noticing static aspects of reality. Primarily objects and then their interconnections. I'd say that an extrovert element is your perceiving function and an introvert is your rational function in you ego.

[XoX]

Depends on whether you are trying to notice these things or if it is natural.

I think it is natural. I might sometimes be absorbed in my mind in a way where I tune out external world. Then I don't notice that much. When I am tuned to external world I notice a lot of details naturally.

Hmm, you appear to be noticing static aspects of reality. Primarily objects and then their interconnections. I'd say that an extrovert element is your perceiving function and an introvert is your rational function in you ego.

I was actually going to ask that. It seems to be static way of perceiving. I wonder if I could be a Ne-type despite noticing all these details. Anyways right now it seems like it is automatic to notice details but I have to make effort to notice meanings. Sort of like calm my mind and make effort to concentrate.

[snegledmaca]

Depends on whether you are trying to notice these things or if it is natural.

I think it is natural. I might sometimes be absorbed in my mind in a way where I tune out external world. Then I don't notice that much. When I am tuned to external world I notice a lot of details naturally.

Hmm, you appear to be noticing static aspects of reality. Primarily objects and then their interconnections. I'd say that an extrovert element is your perceiving function and an introvert is your rational function in you ego.

I was actually going to ask that. It seems to be static way of perceiving. I wonder if I could be a Ne-type despite noticing all these details. Anyways right now it seems like it is automatic to notice details but I have to make effort to notice meanings. Sort of like calm my mind and make effort to concentrate.

I don't know what to say right now, that is, I wouldn't know it is conclusive sign of something. I think you should investigate it further.

don't understand, why are you saying this?

because of this:

An INj can choose to avoid Se aspects of reality, an INp-s cannot. It will hit them out of nowhere, unprepared and they will need the assistance of Se types.

therefore an INj has even less need and less opportunity to develop the element at all. (if they can avoid it most if not all the time, what pressure is there to ever learn?)

just because INp Se-dev is frequently "assisted" and "indirectly controlled" doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

But I'm talking about ability. An INp has less ability to use their then an INj.

Well, it's a conscious element. They will merely ignore the PoLR aspects of reality. If nobody puts pressure on it things should be ok imo. I don't know. I'm not fully understanding you here.

how can the partial dual couple avoid POLR pressure when in ANY given quadra environment, one of the couple's POLR's is frequently used?

Personally I have never in my life time been in a full quadra environment. Even when all the members were of the same quadra. From my experience people adapt so that they don't hit each others PoLR-s, they accommodate.

[Joy]

I don't see Se.

[snegledmaca]

But I'm talking about ability. An INp has less ability to use their Se then an INj.

that all depends upon what you said about unconsciousness. which i don't think holds given hidden agenda. and even if it does hold, it could very well be outstripped by the effect of personal growth. unlike the unconsciousness issue, i think it's hard to dispute that the INj has overwhelmingly less need and opportunity to develop Se.

Personally I have never in my life time been in a full quadra environment. Even when all the members were of the same quadra. From my experience people adapt so that they don't hit each others PoLR-s, they accommodate.

i don't think i've been in a "full" quadra environment either. or met a "full" type (i.e. someone who perfectly fits a given typing) for that matter. but in theory, types with unfavorable POLR/quadra compatabilities tend to get much worse comptability descriptions. for example, why INTj's fare better with INFj's than ISTj's. POLR-adaptation is more likely to occur with similar quadra values with respect to the POLR.

I don't want to clutter up the thread (Any more that is), I think we basically agree but are quibbling on the details of things.