me, an impulsive LII

[strrrng]

I've been impulsive my whole life, not in a 'fun' sense, but in an independent, 'fuck it' attitude way. I have read that Ne correlates with impulsivity. I know the IJ's are characterized by balanced, stable behavior, and that is how I am generally, i.e. maintaining a consistent, disciplined exercise regime. On the one hand, I want control and structure, but on the other, complete freedom from obligations and doing whatever I want (the latter being aplha ).

so, I guess I'm wondering why Ne is associated with impulsivity and if any other LII's have this trait, to whatever degree.

[aestrivex]

impulsivity is not a word.

[discojoe]

Impulsiveness*

[discojoe]

impulsivity is not a word.

lol I didn't read that before posting.

[discojoe]

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=DWLpbcgc814[/youtube]

[reyn_til_runa]

actually impulsivity is a word, can be used instead of impulsiveness. it's used in a lot of psych. resources for some reason.

[strrrng]

—Related forms
im·pul·sive·ly, adverb
im·pul·sive·ness, im·pul·siv·i·ty, noun

[discojoe]

actually impulsivity is a word, can be used instead of impulsiveness. it's used in a lot of psych. resources for some reason.

Oops. Oh well.

[Phaedrus]

I've been impulsive my whole life, not in a 'fun' sense, but in an independent, 'fuck it' attitude way. I have read that Ne correlates with impulsivity. I know the IJ's are characterized by balanced, stable behavior, and that is how I am generally, i.e. maintaining a consistent, disciplined exercise regime. On the one hand, I want control and structure, but on the other, complete freedom from obligations and doing whatever I want (the latter being aplha ).

That is bad reasoning. Wanting complete freedom from obligations and doing whatever you want is absolutely not an indication of Alpha . It is an indication of irrationality, probably most clearly seen in IPs.

so, I guess I'm wondering why Ne is associated with impulsivity and if any other LII's have this trait, to whatever degree.

Impulsivness is typical of extraverted types, but you should not expect to find it in creative types. If you haven't got other very strong reasons for believing that you are an INTj, you should definitely reconsider your self-typing.

[Ezra]

I've been impulsive my whole life, not in a 'fun' sense, but in an independent, 'fuck it' attitude way. I have read that Ne correlates with impulsivity. I know the IJ's are characterized by balanced, stable behavior, and that is how I am generally, i.e. maintaining a consistent, disciplined exercise regime. On the one hand, I want control and structure, but on the other, complete freedom from obligations and doing whatever I want (the latter being aplha ).

so, I guess I'm wondering why Ne is associated with impulsivity and if any other LII's have this trait, to whatever degree.

My LII friend is like this. He says "yeah, go for it", in a bid to be more spontaneous (he believes he's too planned, and wants to be more spontaneous). He jokes, calling it 'planned spontaneity'.

[strrrng]

My LII friend is like this. He says "yeah, go for it", in a bid to be more spontaneous (he believes he's too planned, and wants to be more spontaneous). He jokes, calling it 'planned spontaneity'.

for about a year, up until a month ago, I was very planned. I was strict about my exercise and also about school. I preferred structure and control. I eventually learned how to live more and actually came up with a similar term to denote my compromise, called 'flexible logic'. Now I have become more "free," so to speak. I would actually describe myself now as more relaxed, take-it-as-it-comes, insouciant and, to some degree, lazy.

[Ezra]

My LII friend is like this. He says "yeah, go for it", in a bid to be more spontaneous (he believes he's too planned, and wants to be more spontaneous). He jokes, calling it 'planned spontaneity'.

for about a year, up until a month ago, I was very planned. I was strict about my exercise and also about school. I preferred structure and control. I eventually learned how to live more and actually came up with a similar term to denote my compromise, called 'flexible logic'. Now I have become more "free," so to speak. I would actually describe myself now as more relaxed, take-it-as-it-comes, insouciant and, to some degree, lazy.

It all comes together, like a holiday package. No one can ever achieve good balance.

[strrrng]

It all comes together, like a holiday package. No one can ever achieve good balance.

that's the thing. I think my current laziness is just balancing out how I over-worked myself before.

[strrrng]

If you haven't got other very strong reasons for believing that you are an INTj, you should definitely reconsider your self-typing.

quadra values is probably my strongest reason. here's a post I made when I first joined.....

I like to think about everything, come up with explanations, etc....and I don't care about applying them in reality or even doing anything with them, really; I just want to understand.

even though I apply discipline to areas in my life that I care about, I have a lazy, goofy, lackadasical nature and don't really care deep down about doing a bunch of stuff.....I just weigh out consequences, which motivates me.

first bold is completely.

second bold is related to alpha somewhat, as the combination leads to a playful, pleasure-seeking nature, with less emphasis on taking action towards goals ( ) or planning for the future ( ).

[Phaedrus]

If you haven't got other very strong reasons for believing that you are an INTj, you should definitely reconsider your self-typing.

quadra values is probably my strongest reason. here's a post I made when I first joined.....

I like to think about everything, come up with explanations, etc....and I don't care about applying them in reality or even doing anything with them, really; I just want to understand.

even though I apply discipline to areas in my life that I care about, I have a lazy, goofy, lackadasical nature and don't really care deep down about doing a bunch of stuff.....I just weigh out consequences, which motivates me.

first bold is completely.

Absolutely not. You don't know what you are talking about. You cannot use that popular phrase in the quadra descriptions to justify your typing. It is very misleading in isolation, and typing by quadras alone is a really bad method. Nothing of the above suggests that you are an LII. If that is how you are, you are most likely not an LII. What you describe fits ILI much better than it fits LII.

second bold is related to alpha somewhat, as the combination leads to a playful, pleasure-seeking nature, with less emphasis on taking action towards goals ( ) or planning for the future ( ).

A completely incorrect analysis. You have misunderstood the basics of Socionics. Try to find out your true temperament first (EJ, EP, IJ, or IP). So far you have described yourself as an irrational type. And please remember that LIIs are clearly goal-oriented.

[strrrng]

how can you not say that being interested in philosophy and theorizing without caring to see things materialize isn't ? Everyone who responded to that post said it was.

it seems you are just saying I'm ILI based on my impulsivity.

[strrrng]

read some temperament stuff and here's what I identified with....." relaxed, go-with-the-flow, take things as they come and adapt to them"...that was IP stuff.....I didn't identify with this--"usually very stable mood"...that was IJ. guess you were right

[Phaedrus]

how can you not say that being interested in philosophy and theorizing without caring to see things materialize isn't ?

Because it isn't.

Everyone who responded to that post said it was.

In that case they were all wrong.

it seems you are just saying I'm ILI based on my impulsivity.

I am not saying that you are an ILI. I am saying that you haven't got a case for LII, and that, based on what you have said so far, you are probably not an LII.

[strrrng]

you were listed as a crackpot on this site

[Phaedrus]

you were listed as a crackpot on this site

Yes, that is not surprising. Many people here seem to think that I am one. Judge for yourself based on the content of my posts. Due to my PoLR, and and maybe some other things too, I don't care much about how I present my arguments and claims as long as the content is logical and correct. I can be very blunt and direct, and people usually don't like that. I am also almost totally uninterested in belonging to a group, so I don't make attempts to be accepted. But it is my firm conviction that I am the same type as Jarno and Jonathan, who both believe that they are ILIs. At least Jonathan is also generally accepted as one. I have a slightly less firm conviction that I am also the same type as some other presumed ILIs on this forum, but we can leave them aside for the moment.

[Phaedrus]

Expat doesn't see you as his mirror.

I know. And you probably know what I think of his typing abilities in that respect. He is most likely wrong (unless he is an LSE, which I find rather unlikely). There are lots of indications that we really are Mirrors, and the anomalies that Expat thinks that he can see have been explained by Smilingeyes (yes, that guy again ... but if he writes the best and most illuminating explanations, why should you not read them?) in his "Si column" (somewhere around page 19 or so) in the Delta forum, if I remember correctly.

strrrng's quadra descriptions correspond to Rick's site and the wiki, both of which have popular user feedback systems. and the feedback is pretty positive, from what i've read of it.

There is nothing very wrong with them, but you have to know your correct type first in order to understand the quadras correctly. You should never use quadra descriptions as your primary typing tool. It will most likely lead you astray.

but you think maybe you could back more of your own quadra claims up??

The ironic thing is that I have always come out as a Gamma on every one of Expat's little quadra "tests" on this forum. I also always end up having a > preference, for example in his recent "test" on that. And of course I also have an hidden agenda according to Expat's recent thread on that aspect of the socionic types.

[Expat]

i do read Smilexian socionics. (or at least i am in the process.) there are situations where i diverge from Expat. comparing it to the classical lit on quadra values especially, i think most of Smilex's explainations sound reasonable and touch on some very noticable phenomenon IRL. the most controversial thing about him i can see is "type change", but i think that's pretty easy to isolate that from the rest of the work. i haven't read "Si-column" yet but i will check it out.

I think that (the bolded bit) would be a very big mistake, if you want to understand what smilexian socionics truly is about.

Smilingeyes himself has repeatedly said that he doesn't think that classical socionics works. He also seems to find, so I understand, the idea of an unchangeable type absurd and even repellent. He has also described how he himself "changed" type from ESFj to ENFj to ENTj to ESTj in what are actually very superficial changes in life circumstances, lifestyle, and reactions to the social environment. He has even described how (for instance) you may be in one quadra in one social environment - say, work - and another quadra in another social environment - say, the sports team you join after work.

He also sees Reinin dichotomies as the basic "empirical evidence" for types (contradicting the views of Grigori Reinin himself, who has said that they need empirical validation and that he expects some of them to be discarded!), and has put together a system that proposes to explain how the Reinin dichotomies explain specific behavioral traits.

All of that - especially the idea that your "type" is something that changes because you have changed your lifestyle, rethought your life, or gotten another kind of job, etc - shows that what he focuses on are actually extremely outward, not to say superficial, characteristics - actually little more (or nothing more) than the social role someone is fulfilling in a particular environment. The idea of type change is central to the theory -- it's not just a small detail that can be "easily isolated".

That totally misses the point of what socionics types, and quadras, truly are about (because he's never undersood it), and what he's done has been described by MacBeth:

"it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

[Expat]

on the other hand... one idea i've had is that the INTp's temperament (i agree with how you've described it) offsets the "productivity" statements about gamma somewhat. therefore instead of surplus wealth like the ENTj, the INTp through extroverted thinking might be more so just trying to stay self-sufficient financially, academically, etc. (in comparison INFp's seem as though they can become kind of dependant..)

The INTp and the ESFp have the same goals (if they didn't, they wouldn't be duals, duh).

The goals - common to Gamma - is to accumulate wealth in the context of a long-term relationship with a close individual (or more than one).

Without the INTp, the ESFp tends to shoot in all directions, starting lots of things that fail and go nowhere -- the ESFp's inclination is to "do something, no matter what, right now".

Without the ESFp, the INTp tends to think a lot about what he should or will do in the longer term, and know what can go wrong in specific ventures, but without actually doing much - however much the INTp wishes he would.

The INTp gives the ESFp Ni to understand when it is the best time to act or not to act on something, and what makes sense in the longer term. The ESFp gives the INTp the "push" to get going.

The INTp gives the ESFp the reassurance in Te that specific actions make sense and conform to reality and to what works; the ESFp gives the INTp the reassurance that their bond - and the bond with others - is firm.

As I said elsewhere, the INTp is the ESFp's navigator; the ESFp is the INTp's coach and bodyguard.

But it all only works because they - like all dual pairs - have the same goals in life.

[Gilly]

you were listed as a crackpot on this site

He is.

[Expat]

He also sees Reinin dichotomies as the basic "empirical evidence"

i don't remember him having said that, but maybe i haven't yet read it.

I can't find a precise quote, nor will I look for it; but I think it's clear that he regards Reinin dichotomies as the foundation of socionics.

i think, for example, when smilex discusses quadra values in relation to some like stress/calm (judicious/resolute) he might not be taking into consideration how this relates to the overall backdrop of a person's life, the degree to which that backdrop is effected by inborn or early-nurtured variables, and therefore how much it persists as core motivations in spite of varying environments.

Apart from temperaments, he doesn't seem to see anything as lifelong, constant, core motivations.

however, if we disregard how he might expect us to apply them, i think there is value in how he discusses the components themselves.

What's the point in referring to smelexian socionics then? Unless you mean something like "oh he had a good insight here and there, even if overall his views are rubbish".

couldn't a smilexian tactic be a microcosm for how motivations interact in a more longterm play?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Phaedrus]

the most controversial thing about him i can see is "type change", but i think that's pretty easy to isolate that from the rest of the work.

You are perfectly right about that. Neither do I believe in type change.

i've argued with Joy and others that perhaps they're overemphasized in the earlier stages of typing. for example, consider what i said about the IP temperament and INTp's in the last post. while quadras might share "values" in such a way that promotes "psychological comfort" among the members, the external behavior by how that happens might vary more by type than some people realize. maybe why quasi or superego pairs can be mistaken.

You are right about that too. The importance of the quadras in the earlier stages of typing is highly overemphasized by too many people on this forum. We should definitely try to get rid of that bad habit.

but what you've said about INTj and practical implementation differs so much from other poster's opinions as i understand them, that i'm not even sure that can explain it. i'll have to get back to you on this after reading "Si column" though.

Read as many socionic type descriptions you can (Stratiyevskaya's, Filatova's, and some others are available on this forum) and judge for yourself who is right about the INTjs. Smilingeyes also has something to say about that in his material, if you are interested. And by the way, have you asked the true INTjs on this forum for their opinion?

[strrrng]

There is nothing very wrong with them, but you have to know your correct type first in order to understand the quadras correctly. You should never use quadra descriptions as your primary typing tool. It will most likely lead you astray.

agreed, in retrospect. As for what you guys said about type change, I was never truly certain of my type, so I probably shouldn't have named this thread what I did. My first instinct when beginning socionics was ILI; I identify with irrationality and the IP temperament.

[Expat]

I know. And you probably know what I think of his typing abilities in that respect. He is most likely wrong (unless he is an LSE, which I find rather unlikely).

*gasp* -- sooooooo -- I -- a LSE? And if Phaedrus is ILI, as he says -- that means -- Phaedrus is my supervisor?! -- my PoLR is exposed before his dominant , my hidden agenda is exposed before his 7th? Can this explain everything?

[FDG]

mmmm...you accumulate lots of wealth...and then what do you do with it? it's better to spend away some really, lest wanting to suicide when i'm 40

[Expat]

well take this ESTj description from the behavior tracker for example:

The EJ’s need of safety is completely satisfied. He is participating in a project that is beneficial to everyone involved. Therefore he can be sure that he won’t be betrayed. He is now testing how much advantage he can gain from the situation without breaking the social accord. He’d like to have more personal choice in how matters unfold.

now taking his works as a whole, it seems Smilex thinks this is just a stage that unfolds from the ENTj stage in preparation of the ESFj stage. but i think there's a lot in there that applies to possibly more enduring ESTj motivations themselves too, if we just think about a person for who this is the usual state, and is secure in it. and i think the same is true elsewhere with the connections he draws to Reinin. if you've ever thought to yourself something like "i was having an ENFp moment" i think it's not too out there to imagine making an extrapolation in the other direction (to your usual self) from the more momentary things smilex describes.

Ahh, but on this I agree with you. The behavioral tracker - the whole thread - is in my opinion the most useful bit of smilexian socionics, but I think that's precisely because he complemented the Reinin bits with temperament + functions, which means, closer to classical socionics. I even think that the stuff about how the dichotomies move together within one temperament may well be largely correct.

Also, it makes use of classical socionics, albeit in a roundabout way -- for instance, that is from "concrete Si", isn't it? Then it's not really ESTj, but Si EJ, the transition from emotion-creating to construct-creating. Stuff like "he won't be betrayed" resembles the ESTj Fi dual-seeking, so it rings true to those who thinks in terms of model A, but that's also because emotion-creating and construct-creating are dichotomies that are easily explained by model A. So those bits are best precisely because, in isolation, they are not deviating too much from model A and in fact may be adding to it.

[Expat]

mmmm...you accumulate lots of wealth...and then what do you do with it? it's better to spend away some really, lest wanting to suicide when i'm 40

Before spending it, you have to earn it, don't you? Which is precisely what you do.

[Expat]

FTR i brought up the point about Phaedrus not seeing you as his mirror because i didn't agree with what Phaedrus was saying about INTj's. i meant to demonstrate to the new user the questionableness of Phaedrus's self type. i mentioned his self-type in reference to yours because i trust your self-type much more.

there wasn't anything to my choice of an ESTj example above, in that way, just in case that's what you were thinking. i choose it because it first came to mind for whatever reason. i think the point about activities beneficial to everyone always struck me as interesting, relating socionics to positive sum games.

No worries. I wasn't thinking about your reference to ESTj at all. I used your quote because I have Phaedrus on ignore.

[FDG]

mmmm...you accumulate lots of wealth...and then what do you do with it? it's better to spend away some really, lest wanting to suicide when i'm 40

Before spending it, you have to earn it, don't you? Which is precisely what you do.

and not spending it all immediately as you earn it: doesn't money in the bank ease the ISFj's POLR?

well i'm not here to ease anybody's polr with my money

[Expat]

for types (contradicting the views of Grigori Reinin himself, who has said that they need empirical validation and that he expects some of them to be discarded!), and has put together a system that proposes to explain how the Reinin dichotomies explain specific behavioral traits.

myself, i've emphasized the bolded on the forum time and time again.

however, i don't see how misunderstanding how we validate the relationships necessarily invalidates what Smilex says about explanation. in so far as the jungian foundation explains a set of reinin traits, wouldn't it have to work the other way around? (socionics is constructed as a complete system.) of course i wouldn't trust the explanations based on reversibility alone, but a lot of them make intuitively sense to me too compared to real life.

I'm not sure what you meant here, also because your phrasing is unclear to me.

A few points --

Socionics is not "constructed as a complete system" except in terms of model A (and perhaps some of its variations, but never mind). Reinin dichotomies are something apart, which can be correlated to model A (you just have to read Augusta's and Reinin's attempts at doing it) but model A does not necessarily need Reinin dichotomies, nor do Reinin dichotomies necessarily need model A -- if the precise observable characteristics of the dichotomies could all be observed directly, empirically, "live". That would make them fully independent; alas, the writings by Reinin and Augusta, and Reinin's interview with Lytov, suggest the opposite - that is, that the Reinin dichotomies are theoretical constructs with some support on model A and perhaps some rudimentary observation by Reinin and Augusta, but nothing truly empirical.

[Expat]

that is from "concrete Si", isn't it? Then it's not really ESTj, but Si EJ, the transition from emotion-creating to construct-creating.

Abstract Si
CALCULATING, JUDICIOUSNESS, TACTICAL & CAREFUL are very high and increasing slowly.
TACITURN, PROCESS, ARISTOCRACY & NEGATIVISM are high and decreasing.
COMPLIANCE, GRAVE & EMOTION-CREATING are moderate and decreasing rapidly.

doesn't that correspond to ESTj-Si subtype on the charts?

I stand corrected. I hadn't checked.

t's not ESTj in general, at least not how Smilex interpretted it. i should have clarrified. but i don't think it's just "Si EJ", either. i think that happens a bit later, between "Abstract Si" and "Concrete Si" where

CALCULATING, JUDICIOUSNESS, TACTICAL & CAREFUL are very high and increasing slowly.

transitions into

CALCULATING, JUDICIOUSNESS, TACTICAL & CAREFUL are very high and decreasing slowly.

(so there's a peak in between?)

Yes.

Let us take just two of the above dichotomies - Judiciousness (or Reasonable) and Careful (or Caregiver).

They are both directly related to Si.

So if you are starting from Te EJ - that is, the area between ENTj and ESTj, moving from Gamma to Delta - you are moving from Concrete Te to Abstract Si. As the focus on Te wanes, the focus on Si waxes.

As you move in the area from ESTj to ESFj, the focus on Si wanes, as the focus on Fe waxes.

So the peak for Judiciousness and Careful is the point between ESTj and ESFj, where Si-ESTj and Si-ESFj are actually identical.

[Expat]

on the subject of basic quadra values...does this make any sense?

well i'm not here to ease anybody's polr with my money

well not necessarily your money... but say the combined money of a household. i would have thought Ne POLR + gamma values would incline someone to worry about that and want a buffer. which some of the frugality associated with gamma NT might work best with.

I wouldn't necessarily associate that with the Ne PoLR, perhaps as much with Ni HA and Te dual-seeking -- but it's all connected, so in the end it amounts to the same thing; except -- that is not usually a source of concern for LSIs as such; their Ne PoLR is manifested in other ways.

[strrrng]

another tangent...

[Phaedrus]

I know. And you probably know what I think of his typing abilities in that respect. He is most likely wrong (unless he is an LSE, which I find rather unlikely).

*gasp* -- sooooooo -- I -- a LSE? And if Phaedrus is ILI, as he says -- that means -- Phaedrus is my supervisor?! -- my PoLR is exposed before his dominant , my hidden agenda is exposed before his 7th? Can this explain everything?

Has anyone seriously suggested that you would be an LSE? No. Has anyone suggested that such an assumption would explain anything in our relation? No. So why do you even open your mouth to comment? Strange ... The ONLY reason I mentioned LSE is that that is the ONLY type I can imagine you to be if you are not my Mirror. But I am almost 100 % certain that you really are a LIE, so that hypothetic situation is almost totally irrelevant here.