Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 59

Thread: Se and aggression

  1. #1
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Se and aggression

    This is essentially a brainstorm for ideas about Se and aggression i.e. how they interrelate.

    While I think it's fairly obvious that a Se devaluer who was inept in it - such as the EII - would generally have quite low aggression levels, there are types, such as the LIE, who are weak in Se but yet value it, who can become aggressive. People attribute the EIE's getting wildly forceful and aggressive to "Se HA" e.g. take Hitler's angry little man speeches, where he whines on about the forthcoming Germanic empire. People would naturally see this as Se HA. But what exactly does this mean? If they're inept in Se, and need someone who is proficient in it, surely, by socionics terms, if Se was related to aggression, the LIE and the EIE, even the ILI and the IEI, could not, by definition, become aggressive. But they do. People who are bad in Se get aggressive. But what is most complex about Se as relating to aggression is the fact that Se PoLR people seem almost never to get aggressive (the LII and the EII), while Se ego (particularly base) types (SEE and SLE) are quite often aggressive. This would seem that aggression is in fact related to Se.

    The Wikipedia article for socionics is as follows:

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    Se is responsible for the perception, control, defense, and acquisition of space. It assesses appearance and the geometric form of subjects, estimates whether forces are in alignment or conflict, and uses strength of will and power-based methods to achieve its purposes. Se understands territory and aggression (both physical and psychological).
    LINK

    So, what we gather from this is that Se understands aggression. This does not necessarily imply that Se is aggression. Se's understanding could be likened to the Eight's strategic use of it; they use it to make a gain, unlike the counterphobic Six, who uses it instinctively in order to escape from a threat to their security (this is not to say that the Eight does not use aggression instinctively - because they are an aggressive type by definition - but just that the counterphobic Six will rarely if ever use aggression strategically). Another question that is pertinent here is whether or not weak Se implies that an individual cannot use aggression strategically.

    What do you make of Se? How do you think it relates to aggression?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Florida
    TIM
    ILE 8w9
    Posts
    3,249
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think this pertains to everybody's Se, but I am not comfortable if people mess with my possessions, especially if I do not know about it.
    "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
    --Theodore Roosevelt

    "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
    -- Mark Twain

    "Man who stand on hill with mouth open will wait long time for roast duck to drop in."
    -- Confucius

  3. #3
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't think has anything to do with aggression itself. is just the perception of space, of teritorry, of the real world "as is", in a quantitative manner. For this reason, Rick typed chess as a game.

    Physiologically, is correlated to an high dopamin level. An high dopamin level makes someone a physiological feeling of wanting to compete.

  4. #4
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think with strong that the person is able to effectively use, manage, and create aggression. Their use of aggression and response to aggression is fine-tuned, it isn't clumsy like the use of aggression by types that aren't strong in . Aggression is a way to channel ones will or communicate it very powerfully/clearly to someone else. I think types are good at using it in this way. This does not necessarily mean they are aggressive people (or that Se=aggression), only that they can deal with aggression in a more masterful way. I think that sometimes when types behave aggressively it is simply to communicate their will in an effective way that will get others to listen... it isn't that they've flown off the handle necessarily and have launched into an uncontrolled attack. In fact, I think that types that are weak in Se might be much more likely to fly into uncontrolled attacks on the infrequent occasions where they actually become aggressive (sorry trying to generalize half the socion into one sentence). Anyway, in short, types strong in Se are in general better able to manage aggression. Types weak in Se tend to mismanage it more often than not.

    Looking at it another way, I would probably feel a lot more safe around an Se-dominant who's being aggressive than I would around an Se-PoLR type who's being aggressive. The Se-dominant probably knows what they're doing (and there's a security in that)... the Se PoLR type may have momentarily lost it (there is no security at all).

  5. #5
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    People are individuals. I think people with strong Se are comfortable with confrontation and aggression if it seems necessary, but that doesn't mean that any given person with strong Se would be aggressive in normal circumstances. How aggressive someone with strong Se is depends on the person and the particular circumstance.

    So I think they understand it, they're comfortable with it, and they are capable of using aggression if they find themselves in a circumstance where it would be helpful. But they aren't necessarily running around being aggressive on a regular basis.

    I can see how that would be useful because there are times I'd like to be able to confront someone and be a bit aggressive but I don't feel comfortable with it.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  6. #6
    zenbrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tex-ass
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I do not experience -types as aggressive; I experience them as 'entrenched' and expansive. Their demeanor is rather passive & controlled, but speech patterns and expressions of personal convictions can seem aggressive.

    To me, 's are fortresses against aggression and invasion of territory. Their 'territory' could be mental, physical or emotional space - will dig in and resist all attempts by others to breach the fortress.

    will also move into your 'space' but not aggressively. It's more of a utilitarian march - resolute, confident, smooth. If your space has something that they need (physical, mental, emotional resources), will move into it in order to acquire what they need. If they meet with resistence, they will attempt treatise and compromise - but this is not their primary approach.

  7. #7
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Looking at it another way, I would probably feel a lot more safe around an Se-dominant who's being aggressive than I would around an Se-PoLR type who's being aggressive. The Se-dominant probably knows what they're doing (and there's a security in that)... the Se PoLR type may have momentarily lost it (there is no security at all).
    Haha. I am a bouncer and have to be aggressive on a regular basis.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  8. #8
    zenbrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tex-ass
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dolphin View Post
    In my experience, types are skilled in knowing what type of "persuasion" is needed. Lots of the time this isn't brute force or aggressiveness. They just seem better at knowing what kind of pressure the situation/person calls for.
    Yep. Exactly. Good explanation.

  9. #9
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Haha. I am a bouncer and have to be aggressive on a regular basis.
    But is it always necessary to be aggressive the times when you are, or are there other means of turning people around? (I simply seem to have more faith in Se to manage these things... it's some sort of discriminatory bias of mine!)

    *Anyway, what I'm saying is problematic because it's approaching other biased things that people have said about other IM elements (or lack of)... for instance lots of people of differing types can be good at being a bouncer. I think where my bias is coming in is my Se preference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphin
    In my experience, types are skilled in knowing what type of "persuasion" is needed. Lots of the time this isn't brute force or aggressiveness. They just seem better at knowing what kind of pressure the situation/person calls for.
    Agree.

    For instance, Se types might be very adept at diffusing confrontations with the least amount of aggression necessary.
    Last edited by inumbra; 03-07-2008 at 05:45 PM. Reason: *trying to fix it

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    2,916
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'd think that Se ego types are good at handling this "aggression" instead of them being aggressive like you said.

    And who said Se PoLR types don't get aggressive. They do, and they're bad at handling this aggression, weak Se.
    INTp
    sx/sp

  11. #11
    aka-kitsune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    966
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea View Post
    I'd think that Se ego types are good at handling this "aggression" instead of them being aggressive like you said.

    And who said Se PoLR types don't get aggressive. They do, and they're bad at handling this aggression, weak Se.
    This sounds really spot on. I know I must definitely have weak .

    Anytime I have gotten angry/aggro, it's channeled through a rather uncontrolled emotional expression, and I'm always *really* uncomfortable with it. I just don't know how to be firm without my emotions ultimately getting in the way to some extent.

    I'd have to say I'm very averse to aggression in general.
    socio: INFp - IEI
    ennea: 4w5 sp/sx

    **********

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Twain
    Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we'.

  12. #12
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Regarding base function , you can read my post on it here:
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...5&postcount=25

    With that out of the way, my manifests itself as a strong awareness and alertness of the things going on in my environment. With that, I can become territorial of these objects or events, whether they actually belong to me or not. (And for the record, I often do.) I'm normally quite calm, but when the presence or absence of something important registers in my mind, you'll likely get an "aggressive" response out of me.

    Several examples:

    1) machintruc or dee is being a misinformed douchebag. The absence of common sense immediately jumps out at me, so I call him out on it. In a way, I see the forums as an open territory, and I react assertively when it gets "contaminated" by something undesirable (read: machintruc or dee being a misinformed douchebag). I'll make an attempt to make machintruc or dee shut up. If that doesn't work, I'll attempt to remove machintruc or dee altogether. Of course I can't do the later because I'm not an admin, but you get the idea.

    2) My friend, Will, steals the cookies I just bought out of my backpack while I'm off talking to someone at another table. I come back, and see that they're not there (IE, something important is no longer present in the territory of the lunch table). I know that the only people at the table who would steal my cookies are Will or Dan. I first check Dan and his backpack, because he's somewhat fat and he always wants me to give him a piece of my cookie. The search of Dan's backpack comes up empty (it is no longer uncharted territory), so I immediately turn to Will. That motherfucker put the cookies into his backpack, so I grab back my cookies and steal a part of his lunch. Territory gained!


    Anyways, you'll get varying degrees of aggression in individual type people, and I think that any aggression is just a side effect of an awareness of surrounding territory. I cringe when people think that aggression is an essential componant of the description, because they're ignoring the important underlying causes behind it.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  13. #13
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,750
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea View Post
    I'd think that Se ego types are good at handling this "aggression" instead of them being aggressive like you said.

    And who said Se PoLR types don't get aggressive. They do, and they're bad at handling this aggression, weak Se.
    yeah, or they overreact to aggression, thus becoming aggressive when it isn't called for.
    6w5 sx
    model Φ: -+0
    sloan - rcuei

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    2,916
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Herzy View Post

    2) My friend, Will, steals the cookies I just bought out of my backpack while I'm off talking to someone at another table. I come back, and see that they're not there (IE, something important is no longer present in the territory of the lunch table). I know that the only people at the table who would steal my cookies are Will or Dan. I first check Dan and his backpack, because he's somewhat fat and he always wants me to give him a piece of my cookie. The search of Dan's backpack comes up empty (it is no longer uncharted territory), so I immediately turn to Will. That motherfucker put the cookies into his backpack, so I grab back my cookies and steal a part of his lunch. Territory gained!
    INTp
    sx/sp

  15. #15
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    But is it always necessary to be aggressive the times when you are, or are there other means of turning people around? (I simply seem to have more faith in Se to manage these things... it's some sort of discriminatory bias of mine!)
    I would have to say yes, it is always necessary to be aggresive the times when I am.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  16. #16
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy
    I would have to say yes, it is always necessary to be aggresive the times when I am.
    Okay. I feel somewhat bad about my post in that I do think I was being biased.
    Last edited by inumbra; 03-08-2008 at 11:05 PM.

  17. #17
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    since when does a mode of information processing = aggression? Se is simply observing reality in a concrete way, taking in the environment as separate from oneself and paying attention to, well, sensory data.

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    I don't think has anything to do with aggression itself. is just the perception of space, of teritorry, of the real world "as is", in a quantitative manner.
    EXACTLY

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    For this reason, Rick typed chess as an Se game.
    well, he's wrong. chess is a gamma NT game.

  18. #18
    BLauritson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    979
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea View Post
    And who said Se PoLR types don't get aggressive. They do, and they're bad at handling this aggression, weak Se.
    One of the directors at work, whom I've typed INFj based on rather little information, seems to come across as quite forceful at times, but I get the feeling he's genuinely unaware that he's doing this. It's hard to explain what it's like exactly; it's one of those things you need to see to understand, but I do wonder if that's an example of Se PoLR.
    ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
    5w4 so/sx

    "IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"

    Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
    Stickam music performances

  19. #19
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea View Post
    I'd think that Se ego types are good at handling this "aggression" instead of them being aggressive like you said.

    And who said Se PoLR types don't get aggressive. They do, and they're bad at handling this aggression, weak Se.
    There is something amiss in how this thread is treating Se, PoLR Se, and aggression. I shouldn't be able to do my job if what you say about Se PoLR is true.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  20. #20
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    well, he's wrong. chess is a gamma NT game.
    h4h4H4, yEahHhH, gUd 1 !!!!!!!!1111111

    Explain why.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    2,916
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    There is something amiss in how this thread is treating Se, PoLR Se, and aggression. I shouldn't be able to do my job if what you say about Se PoLR is true.
    My dad is an LII. And he's in a managerial position, and still able to do his job. I don't understand what you mean.
    But what I observe of him is that he's kinda passive aggressive. When someone steps on his head, sometimes he's pretty unsure what to do. Like he'll either say forget about it, or blow his top at the wrong time/situation/person. I have seen him do this to customers & workers, but when a customer service officer does not provide good service, he doesn't voice it out. Not all the time though. I'm no Se dominant, of course I may be wrong.
    Herzy's description was pretty good, similar to what I've seen in Se dominants.
    INTp
    sx/sp

  22. #22
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is ridiculous, Ezra. Aggression is not SOLELY dependent on the use of Se. Besides, everyone knows that everyone uses every function to some extent; if Ni types didn't use Se at all they'd be bashing off the walls and punching policemen left and right. This is another one of your biggest problems right now: you are trying to let Socionics assume the role of a catch-all explainer for everything about people.

    Don't.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  23. #23
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    h4h4H4, yEahHhH, gUd 1 !!!!!!!!1111111

    Explain why.
    using Se in chess amounts to nothing more than observing the pieces as they are, on a linear spatial plane. Ni is the most important function in chess: seeing the interconnectedness of the whole board, how processes play out (in time)...etc. that coupled with Te, which is the objective activity of objects, is the best combination. Te will be able to logically track what is happening and formulate the Ni understanding into a concrete plan.

  24. #24
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea View Post
    My dad is an LII. And he's in a managerial position, and still able to do his job. I don't understand what you mean.
    But what I observe of him is that he's kinda passive aggressive. When someone steps on his head, sometimes he's pretty unsure what to do. Like he'll either say forget about it, or blow his top at the wrong time/situation/person. I have seen him do this to customers & workers, but when a customer service officer does not provide good service, he doesn't voice it out. Not all the time though. I'm no Se dominant, of course I may be wrong.
    Herzy's description was pretty good, similar to what I've seen in Se dominants.
    You don't see how being passive aggressive, unsure, letting things go, blowing up at the wrong time is unnacceptable for a bouncer? That shit will get me killed.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    2,916
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    You don't see how being passive aggressive, unsure, letting things go, blowing up at the wrong time is unnacceptable for a bouncer? That shit will get me killed.
    ? why do you sound so defensive. -_-
    INTp
    sx/sp

  26. #26
    Mariano Rajoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,120
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea View Post
    ? why do you sound so defensive. -_-
    Imagining myself behaving as an Se PoLR is expected to would have unnacceptable consequences.



    Underestimation, hesitation, and complacency get people hurt. If I suck at my job, there are immediate, observable consequenses.
    LII
    that is what i was getting at. if there is an inescapable appropriation that is required in the act of understanding, this brings into question the validity of socionics in describing what is real, and hence stubborn contradictions that continue to plague me.

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    83
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yea, being the PoLR in an unfriendly environment is really stressful for me. It can seem like the only way I can get people to listen to me is by being really testy and eager to butt heads. I earn a very bad rep when I do this, but it gets things done. The other problem is that it can be hard to turn "off" this constant aggression and I can get into arguments with people who are just making jokes or trying to be nice. I think this is the source of a lot of my conflicts with ENTps. They're just joking around and I'm trying to get people to take me seriously, and I end up putting them down a lot. I would say I have more trouble recognizing a situation that justifies the use of aggression, rather than actually using it and that is what having weak is all about. It's not that I am a pushover, it's that I often don't realize when I am being pushed over.

    I think that is where our bouncing friend is coming from. Being a bouncer, it would be easy to determine which situations require the use of force and which ones don't, once you figure out all the rules of engagement. If you get to the point where you can convert to , it's much easier. Not caring about the people you have to "take care of" would also make it a lot easier.

    The most trouble I have is when it comes to defending my interests against friends. It's hard to honor , damage , and use all at the same time. I had a really good IEI friend that was a total mooch and I tolerated it for a long time until I just told him to fuck off and stopped talking to him for a while (we did get together again).
    Last edited by ataronchronon; 03-09-2008 at 03:24 AM.
    INTj

  28. #28
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    using Se in chess amounts to nothing more than observing the pieces as they are, on a linear spatial plane. Ni is the most important function in chess: seeing the interconnectedness of the whole board, how processes play out (in time)...etc. that coupled with Te, which is the objective activity of objects, is the best combination. Te will be able to logically track what is happening and formulate the Ni understanding into a concrete plan.
    I'm sure Gary Kasparov's success as an SEE would beg to differ.

    Se is not just about "seeing where things are;" this is a very shallow understanding of the function indeed. That's just as much about Te, if you ask me: the "current state" of things, so to speak, and how it is changing. And yes, with Ni, this can be useful in chess, but not without Se. In chess, Se is about recognizing the "power" of the pieces, the abilities they possess to affect the environment around them. Combined with a certain amount of Ti (but really only so much as is necessary to understand the basic static properties of the pieces), Se is basically THE chess function.

    Look at one of the greatest "chess" players of all time: Napoleon. His game wasn't limited to a board, and encompassed many things he couldn't just "see" in front of his face. And yet he is perhaps one of the most obvious examples of an Se dominant we have from the past. He knew the power he possessed, how to utilize it, where to strike and for what reason. But he had absolutely no Ni: had he, the forthcoming winter in Russia most likely not have been his eventual demise.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,687
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Se is not just about "seeing where things are;" this is a very shallow understanding of the function indeed. That's just as much about Te, if you ask me: the "current state" of things, so to speak, and how it is changing. And yes, with Ni, this can be useful in chess, but not without Se. In chess, Se is about recognizing the "power" of the pieces, the abilities they possess to affect the environment around them. Combined with a certain amount of Ti (but really only so much as is necessary to understand the basic static properties of the pieces), Se is basically THE chess function.
    I'm trying to better understand -- I can see how recognising the 'power' of each piece is seeing the "external statics of objects", but how is seeing the way in which they affect the environment around them also "external statics of objects"? Wouldn't that be a property of fields? (or is this where the Ti you mentioned comes in?)

    I can see why strrrng suggested Ni - the best chess players look ahead and examine the possible consequences of each available action (understanding how processes evolve over time?), but then again I don't really know how this relates to being able to process the "internal dynamics of fields"

  30. #30
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "External statics of objects," or Se, indicates the way in which the pieces are capable of moving in their environment. They are "static" properties of the "object" (the piece) that dictate how it can maneuver in the "external" space in which it exists (the board).

    "External statics of fields," or Ti, when paired with Se, indicates the way in which the static properties that dictate the movement of the piece allow it to interact (this is the "fields" part) with other pieces in its environment. Given the Se properties of movement of the piece, and the Ti understanding of the ways in which this movement gives it the ability to interact with other pieces, the chess player is able to examine what move will place the player in the most advantageous position, given all of the pieces on the board and their current positions and the ways in which they can interact with one another given their capacity for movement.


    I might get into Te and Ni later.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,687
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    "External statics of fields," or Ti, when paired with Se, indicates the way in which the static properties that dictate the movement of the piece allow it to interact (this is the "fields" part) with other pieces in its environment.
    Alright cool, this is what I was thinking.

  32. #32
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    This is ridiculous, Ezra. Aggression is not SOLELY dependent on the use of Se. Besides, everyone knows that everyone uses every function to some extent; if Ni types didn't use Se at all they'd be bashing off the walls and punching policemen left and right. This is another one of your biggest problems right now: you are trying to let Socionics assume the role of a catch-all explainer for everything about people.

    Don't.
    You didn't read my initial post, and simply assumed that I have beliefs about something that I don't. This is a brainstorming session, not an analysis of what I think about Se and how it is wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    using Se in chess amounts to nothing more than observing the pieces as they are, on a linear spatial plane. Ni is the most important function in chess: seeing the interconnectedness of the whole board, how processes play out (in time)...etc. that coupled with Te, which is the objective activity of objects, is the best combination. Te will be able to logically track what is happening and formulate the Ni understanding into a concrete plan.
    Yeah, that's what I expected to here. Good stuff.

  33. #33
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    I'm sure Gary Kasparov's success as an SEE would beg to differ.

    Se is not just about "seeing where things are;" this is a very shallow understanding of the function indeed. That's just as much about Te, if you ask me: the "current state" of things, so to speak, and how it is changing. And yes, with Ni, this can be useful in chess, but not without Se. In chess, Se is about recognizing the "power" of the pieces, the abilities they possess to affect the environment around them. Combined with a certain amount of Ti (but really only so much as is necessary to understand the basic static properties of the pieces), Se is basically THE chess function.

    Look at one of the greatest "chess" players of all time: Napoleon. His game wasn't limited to a board, and encompassed many things he couldn't just "see" in front of his face. And yet he is perhaps one of the most obvious examples of an Se dominant we have from the past. He knew the power he possessed, how to utilize it, where to strike and for what reason. But he had absolutely no Ni: had he, the forthcoming winter in Russia most likely not have been his eventual demise.
    I would firstly like to applaud you on finally realizing your true type.

    Now, I don't care about an isolated example of a person who you have typed a certain way being successful at chess. unless you can show me concrete evidence of him being that type - which wouldn't matter anyway because he was probably blessed with great genetic intelligence - I won't bother listening to that.

    Se is the external statics of objects. it is external, meaning measurable. it looks at objects, meaning seeing each chess piece separate from one another. it is static, which means the state of each piece. You are right, that it can gauge the "power" of each piece, but do not confuse that with judging its potential, which would be Ne, and DEFINITELY do not confuse it with Te, which tracks the MOVEMENTS of the pieces. look at the bolded part - that is absolutely generic and vague. if you're looking at how they can affect things around them, that is a potential quality of them, not an external static.

    napolean may very well be an Se dominant, but note that Se values Ni, which he could have used quite a bit and, as mentioned before, his intelligence was far above most men, so he is not a great example.

  34. #34
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    for anyone who is under the illusion that Se is the chess function, consider this explanation.

    In chess, what do you do? what is significant? you develop a plan to capture your opponent's king. you make each move after looking at every (significant) possible move and also at how each of those moves plays out down the line. not only this, but you must be able to make the connections that aren't readily visible; you must be able to foresee virtually everything. This is what Ni does. It looks at the underlying abstract patterns governing the pieces and their relationships. It almost instinctively looks at the way things play out, given a certain move. with that, it is able to penetrate to the essence of the situation, and understand the most significant patterns, both tangible and intangible. because of this, it can easily formulate a vision, or foresight, necessary to actually do anything significant in the game. So, you are now here: you have seen these patterns and possibilities, and are now trying to decide which of, say, three plausible moves you will make. This is where Te comes in. while Ni is developing this continual vision, Te is keeping an objective check on exactly what is happening, understanding logical cause-and-effect relationships. When you have these three possible actions, Te simply compares each and eventually chooses one, not necessarily because it is better, but because some plan must be formulated. It is what implements the internal vision of Ni into an external, structured plan. given that it is dynamic, this plan can change, if necessary, but typically it will be so developed that it won't need to.

    so, fuck up with that Se bullshit

  35. #35
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    look at the bolded part - that is absolutely generic and vague. if you're looking at how they can affect things around them, that is a potential quality of them, not an external static.
    Are you serious? I was going to give the rest of your post a response that was at least somewhat thoughtful until I read this. Apparently we are not talking about the same things. We can argue over IM definitions, but given that you appear to not understand what the terms used to define them precisely when taken in the context of socionics, you are not talking about Socionics, and in addition you are ignoring virtually all common wisdom regarding what Se is and account for in real life.

    As for the types of Kasparov and Napolean and their relevance to their success, well, I can't say I know a whole lot about what Napolean did other than the obviously Beta-esque means that he used to motivate his troops, but that is obviously secondary to the strategies that he used to win battles, which, I still claim, is heavily related to Se in the way that I have explained (which, I reiterate, is in concurrence with all commonly accepted views of Se in both this community and those in Russia, as far as I know).

    Kasparov's type is discussed in depth here:
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=14066

    And Rick has him as one of his benchmark SEEs here:
    http://www.socionics.us/celebrities/see_2.shtml
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  36. #36
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well, I find it quite humorous that you ignored my second post, which gave a thorough explanation of why Ni and Te are the chess functions.

    As for what you quoted, I can assure you it was due more to a miscommunication than my misunderstanding, contrary to what you would prefer to believe. when you said "Se can recognize the "power" of the pieces and how they affect the pieces around them," I interpreted that in two ways. First, I never understand what you meant by "power" because that was pretty vague and generic. Second, when you said "how they can affect the pieces around them" I thought of the general manifestation of Se, which is objects in their concrete form on a spatial plane, which could cause some linear interaction among them. But I thought it also flirted with being Ne because it seemed to represent some potentiality. Now I see what you meant, so hopefully you can move past that and respond to the rest of my posts.

    I would like to know what your response to my second post is. Anyone can take one quote out of context and use it as an excuse not to respond, and typically this is done when they have no other counter argument. Unless, you're gonna respond to my whole post, don't waste my time.

  37. #37
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Did I ever say that Te or Ni were unimportant? I definitely agree that they have their place in chess, and there are certainly ways to play chess that are more based around their applications than those of Se. I think all three are absolutely necessary for playing chess; my arguments were only contradicting your assertion of Se being "useless" in chess aside from seeing the board.


    As for my loose assertion that Se is THE chess function, well, it wasn't really my true goal to prove that statement beyond reasonable doubt; it was more hyperbole than anything. I think it would be pretty retarded to try to prove that any one or two functions are solely responsible for anything. But sure, I retract my statement. Let's get on with life.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  38. #38
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    come to think of it, Fe is probably the most important function for chess...

  39. #39
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was about to do a little side track about how Si and Fe, even, are actually fairly important in terms of what you allow your opponent to notice about your expressions and reactions to what is going on; this can definitely help you get inside the other person's head and see what they are up to.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  40. #40
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    and let's not forget about Fi...if you don't have that ardent love for your king and bitter hate for your opponent, you might as well forget about playing altogether.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •