A few quotes from another thread:
Originally Posted by jessica129
Fe PoLR anyone?
A few quotes from another thread:
Fe PoLR anyone?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
lol, I don't even remember writing that. Odd.
I don't know. I generally agree with everything she wrote. Maybe I'm missing key context.
(
)
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
Or maybe your early days in Delta helped you understand SLIs better. :wink:
Anyhow, why should you not agree? And if you're both strong producing subtypes there would be less conflict and more mirror-like feel between you.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Sadly that hasn't transferred into real life.
SEE friend has a new SLI boyfriend - a week later, over coffee, she tells me: 'X doesn't like you. He thinks you're hyperactive, manipulative and mercurial.'
Oh well, can't win them all.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
I'm not entirely sure I grasp the theory here. According to this, am I bound to get along better with SLI-Te over SLI-Si? Why?
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
That's funny cause initial impressions have usually been positive in my experience.Sadly that hasn't transferred into real life.
SEE friend has a new SLI boyfriend - a week later, over coffee, she tells me: 'X doesn't like you. He thinks you're hyperactive, manipulative and mercurial.'
Oh well, can't win them all.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Yeah, I found it a bit strange as well, but it was probably contextual - though in this case, I guess getting to know me better might not necessarily be the greatest solution to the problem.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
From what I can tell he's probably a fool, but how do you know he's SLI in the first place?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Nah, he's not a bad guy. Well, idolatrie thinks very badly of him, but he's genuinely not a bad guy.
I don't know him personally that well, but I've met him/interacted with him quite a few times since. Law students are an incestuous pool anyway. And she knows about socionics and we spent quite a while typing him over coffee.
He's confident but quiet. Very well dressed. Neat appearance. Used to be a big drinker/partier, but mostly, he's quiet and stands around the walls/corners at social events. Appraising what's going on, rather than hiding away. He makes comments on people's appearances quite a bit in a way that makes my Si PoLR squirm - it's a very direct, physical appraisal. Enjoys his food, but in very good shape - is very capable of looking after his body/health and sort of seems dismissive of people who can't. Very calm and coolheaded all the time - not emotionally excitable - has minimal facial variation. Reading him is like reading a rock. Thinks social sciences and humanities is a waste of time - told my friend she should have studied languages instead of history because languages have some practical application.
When I meant contextual, I meant the first three times I met him, I was in three different contexts: in a courtroom, in a meeting and then at a party. He doesn't like how much my behaviour changes from one context to another - he finds that highly untrustworthy.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
I intentionally said that to see if you were gonna defend him.
That does sound like SLI, but also somewhat like LSI and perhaps SLE-Ti.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
I intentionally said that to see if you were gonna defend him.It's a reflex.
LSI: Only superficially. LSIs are easy to read, especially with their displeasure. They also don't find contextually shifting emotional behaviour puzzling or irritating - they find it unremarkable and where they notice it, they generally admire the ability to adapt/control emotions to best suit the circumstances. And he's much calmer than an LSI under pressure. An LSI under pressure is emotionally terse, but they look somewhat volcanic and 'clamp down' a lot. He just always seems unruffled. Maybe there are situations that stress him out - but he has a very high threshold.That does sound like SLI, but also somewhat like LSI and perhaps SLE-Ti.
I considered SLE-Ti for him - especially when I thought I was IEE and was flummoxed by him being my dual, but there is no way this guy is Fi PoLR. He makes judge-y comments about people's relationships all the time - part of his disliking of me was that he didn't think I behaving the role of a proper friend. He thought I was 'fakely' manipulating my friend; eroding her self-esteem. He talks about subjects that SLEs generally are skittish about. My SEE friend describes him as a 'hard rock with a soft gooey center' - they, uh, talk about feelings and relationships a lot.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
Out of curiosity, what - in your opinion - are these subjects?
Try holding a knife to his throat.
LSI: Only superficially. LSIs are easy to read, especially with their displeasure. They also don't find contextually shifting emotional behaviour puzzling or irritating - they find it unremarkable and where they notice it, they generally admire the ability to adapt/control emotions to best suit the circumstances. And he's much calmer than an LSI under pressure. An LSI under pressure is emotionally terse, but they look somewhat volcanic and 'clamp down' a lot. He just always seems unruffled. Maybe there are situations that stress him out - but he has a very high threshold.
You don't have to get along with duals.I considered SLE-Ti for him - especially when I thought I was IEE and was flummoxed by him being my dual, but there is no way this guy is Fi PoLR. He makes judge-y comments
I knew a guy, who was hard to read, who used to sometimes seem to get the impression that I manipulated, and controlled people. Sometimes he kind of exploded at me. And he'd say that I was "wrong".about people's relationships all the time - part of his disliking of me was that he didn't think I behaving the role of a proper friend. He thought I was 'fakely' manipulating my friend; eroding her self-esteem. He talks about subjects that SLEs generally are skittish about. My SEE friend describes him as a 'hard rock with a soft gooey center' - they, uh, talk about feelings and relationships a lot.
Anyway, he was pretty hard to deal with. It's not nice when people say that you manipulate/control people, when you're just trying to create a comfortable environment.
Proper behaviour in a relationship - how boyfriends/girlfriends should act toward each other as good people; people's characters - the way in which their actions reflect if they're 'good' or 'bad' people. The degree, strength and authenticity of a relationship between two people - how they should and shouldn't behave accordingly and what their behaviour indicates about that relation -- these are topics I think that SLE/ILEs avoid generally and that Fi HA people are comfortable with and/or welcome. Not overtly - not in a pushy way -- but this particular SLI clearly thought it was a relevant topic of conversation that he was comfortable about making a determination on.
Actually, just thinking about it, back in high school, with another SEE and another SLI, the same scenario happened. The SLI judged my relationship with the SEE and told them that I was not a 'good friend' and that I was behaving in a controlling or manipulative way toward the SEE and deliberately eroding the SEE's self-confidence/self-esteem.
Maybe it's that specific combination of types/intertype relations that produces this...my conflictor and my beneficiary.
As an addendum post-Sneg's response - I mean 'proper' without any Ti connotations. Like, Richard and Julie should be, rather than how Person A should be with respect to Person B. It's the nuances, the sensitivities, the grey undefined areas that I think SLE/ILE gets tripped up on. I see Fi as a form of propriety as much as Ti is.
Precisely!
Last edited by unefille; 10-16-2008 at 02:38 PM.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
That sounds like valued Ti, imposing rules upon the conduct in a relationship instead of letting the relation evolve naturally, be a reflection of the people in it.
I am him and he is me.He's confident but quiet. Very well dressed. Neat appearance. Used to be a big drinker/partier, but mostly, he's quiet and stands around the walls/corners at social events. Appraising what's going on, rather than hiding away. He makes comments on people's appearances quite a bit in a way that makes my Si PoLR squirm - it's a very direct, physical appraisal. Enjoys his food, but in very good shape - is very capable of looking after his body/health and sort of seems dismissive of people who can't. Very calm and coolheaded all the time - not emotionally excitable - has minimal facial variation. Reading him is like reading a rock. Thinks social sciences and humanities is a waste of time - told my friend she should have studied languages instead of history because languages have some practical application
Sounds very SLI to me.
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.
It's a different idea of proper than I have, in the sense that as long as you follow specific 'rules' of what a relationship is, then you have a relationship and if you don't, then you don't. I personally use this attitude to defining things to my own advantage, which is shitty of me.
Their sense of 'propriety' is based on something unspoken and less defined but (to me) very restrictive. Less wiggle room in some ways, more wiggle room in others.
In this case, had the SLI I was discussing earlier been a Ti-valuer, he would have seen nothing wrong in the way I behaved toward my friend whilst competing against her. According to any 'rules' of friendship, I broke none. But he saw something else 'improper' about my behaviour. Something akin to: given what our relationship was, he saw me acting in contravention of it somehow - less warm, less supportive - he wasn't exactly forthcoming. I can't really put my finger on it, but I'm sure from a Ti perspective, my behaviour was exemplary. But I will admit that I cooled toward her during the competition period -- and he noted that and found it in contravention of what he thought appropriate.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
The description sounds more like a ST type. More likely ISTx but difficult to say from that description if it is ISTj or ISTp.
One way you can maybe tell is how he responds to people trying to cheer him up. Another is to look at the J and P dichotomy and which one applies to him.
Often, ISTp's can have a poorer control of their emotions if someone mocks them or prods them in general in an Fe way, because Fe is their PoLR. ISTj's tend to be thicker skinned or handle this better. They're less likely to react inappropriately.
If he has fixed ideas of what is right and wrong, of how people should act and shouldn't, and these rules should be applied universally, almost regardless of circumstance, then that signifies a Ti ego point of view. A Fi point of view would recognize the unique status of the relationship and would try to asses it, in the context of the individuals involved, focus on the uniqueness, not on a violation of (objective) universality.
But perhaps this is what he was doing but your portrayal of the situation reflects your own interpretation of it, like, you perceive it as if he thought that some rules that govern relationships were broken. Where he really just though the way you were treating this specific individual was unwarranted not because of any rule but because of the individual.
Also, I have become convinced that jessica is not capable of giving a valid assessment of what kind of a person she really is. That is, whether she says she identifies with descriptions or not, displays certain behavior or not, I think is largely irrelevant. I think she could be nothing like a description and yet be completely unaware of this and identify with it.
That's exactly it - I phrased it badly because when I think of proper, I think of 'binds' - which describes what it looks like to me, but not what it in fact is. I meant he saw what he thought deemed inappropriate in my behaviour specific to that friend, not to friendship generally. In fact that was the jist - he thought that I shouldn't behave toward her the same way I would behave toward 'any other friend' - that I was being a bad friend because my behaviour did not reflect the supposed closeness she told him we had - so he saw it as all being on her side, and me essentially 'stringing along' her devotion.
Also, I think an Fi-valuer who is nevertheless weak in Fi, such as the SLI, is likely to misread these situations quite a lot, particularly if they distrust Fe -- thus jumping to conclusions.
What they saw wrong specifically was within the context of the individuals involved, not the status of the relationship. In my case, the basic accusation was insensitivity - or lack of care for my friends feelings. The 'manipulative' was directed at their perception that I always acted so as to be appear to be behaving 'properly' in an impersonal context, at the expense of my friendships toward the people they cared about. That I was more concerned with how I appeared than the actual state of my relationships.
Whilst I wouldn't say this is at all a fair evaluation, I can see why, given what we each value, they reached that conclusion.
3w4-1w2-5w4 sx/sp
Could you go into detail of the interaction.
I've noticed before, that some people can misinterpret if I threaten people. Is that Fe versus Fi? Like I used to threaten people I knew well, but it's like only if it was a real boundary ..Also, I think an Fi-valuer who is nevertheless weak in Fi, such as the SLI, is likely to misread these situations quite a lot, particularly if they distrust Fe -- thus jumping to conclusions.
Strictly speaking, some people say you should never threaten friends.
People should be responsible for their own feelings.What they saw wrong specifically was within the context of the individuals involved, not the status of the relationship. In my case, the basic accusation was insensitivity - or lack of care for my friends feelings. The 'manipulative' was directed at their perception that I
Like you were polite, but negative?always acted so as to be appear to be behaving 'properly' in an impersonal context, at the expense of my friendships toward the people they cared about. That I was more concerned with how I appeared than the actual state of my relationships.
This statement means nothing to me.Whilst I wouldn't say this is at all a fair evaluation, I can see why, given what we each value, they reached that conclusion.
Jessica reminds me of Mirtha Jung from Blow (penelope cruz's character). Beta ST chick to the max.
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...
Jessica, can you make a post as to why you think you could be ISTp or ESTp? And which one you think you are out out of the two and elaborate?
It helps me a lot of people ask me direct questions that would help to prove one type over the other. When I attempt to talk about myself, people say it doesn't provide enough useful information to prove it's one or the other. I don't know what else to say about myself, really. ISTP makes the most sense but like I said, I've had the best relationships with those of the Beta quadra and when it reallllly comes down to it, I think my personality fits more there. However, some things about ESTP don't make sense. I am not commanding, my self esteem sucks, I'm not outgoing, I'm shy, I don't really like people, I have no motivation for almost everything, etc. The ISTP stereotype of being a lazyass doesn't vibe well with me either. Like I said, I'm very aggressive and not afraid to take the initiative when it's something i care about. What does that mean? Who knows. I'm just throwing it out there.
And that points to nothing. Ha. Specific questions help.
You've read this, right?
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...Enigmatic_ISTp
INFj
9w1 sp/sx
To me, what you wrote still sounds like ESTp. Not having strong ethics either way, makes for shy, low self esteem in those realms. The aggressiveness comes out to make up for it. And not being afraid to take the initiative sounds extratim. An ESTp doesn't have to be verbally commanding all of the time. It's more about physical presence. Does your physical presence "command?" Not liking people is not caring about Fi, to me. I have a very hard time liking people and even knowing if someone else likes me. That's pretty nonexistent for me. And usually stabs me in the back later when I've done or said something that offends them without realizing they actually liked me already. It's only been the ones who understand I don't mean offense in the first place when I say something "offensive" or punch them when talking to them...that have become my friends.
To me, everything you said still points to ESTp. It's the theory bullshit that gets in the way of understanding the theory. hahahaha! The only way I finally saw that was leaving the forum for a couple of weeks to see real life doing it's thang.
I love that description. Rocky wrote that, right? I think this helps me even more when it comes to ISTP outweighing ESTP. I forget that ISTP's act this way---which i do VERY MUCH. I think this phrase sums up a lot of my personality and for some reason I never thought other ISTP's were like this and maybe that's why i was confusing it with ESTP-ish behavior:
One problem for the ISTps is that they can be emotionally irritated; and sometimes even be unstable. They might not take teasing or any form of deprecation well. When ISTps feel hurt, or their ethics are judged, they push away and withdraw from others. They can show rude or tactless behavior towards people, sometimes flat out ignoring them. When they either feel harmed or frustrated, their generally placid appearance quickly turns fiery and aggressive. In their aggression, they might hit or throw something to let their energy out. ISTps may also become pushy when they run out of patience.
Just a comment - that's a dumb stereotype to begin with. They don't expend any more energy than they need to, and if it's something they don't care about, you can forget about getting them to do it at all (or if they do it, they're rather grumpy about it. lol). Once they decide to do something, they usually take care of it quite efficiently. Depends entirely on what it is, how urgent it is, how much they care about it... I guess it depends where they want to spend their energy. My ex usually accomplished annoying things in one fell swoop because he knew his energy level and interest would drop off if he let it sit. And he was very judicious at deciding which projects were worth it and which weren't. Personal projects he'd take a little more time with and do as it interested him.The ISTP stereotype of being a lazyass
IEE
I don't "like people" either. But I definitely still value Fi over Fe.
It think it just means some Fi valuers may not care about most people as a whole, but still greatly value the long term friends who know us best. Once again, this is something that can be applied to anyone of any type, but I don't think it necessarily point away from Fi.
In fact, it might indicate a lack of concern for Fe?
Good points. Uh oh. More confusion. lol.
I am oblivous...COMPLETELY oblivious as to how others perceive me. Something that sticks out, however, is how many times i get told I have "leadership" qualities because I have a very "serious prescence". I would also assume that indicates a "demanding presence". Everytime someone says that i do a 'Where did that come from?!' My AF recruiter keeps mocking me telling me I'm going to become a drill instructor.
Not liking people has nothing to do with type. It might have to do with relationships if you're one type and surrounded by people of conflicting types. Or it might just have to do with a stage in someone's life. It might be in part about being introverted for some people.
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.
My impression from this is that you are a socionic extravert. It also (seems) to point to you being an irrational type (ie XXXp.) There is very little in your description(s) that fit's an N type.
Try sitting this short dichotomy test and see how you get on. If there is parts you are unsure of, mention them or ask questions, along with providing your results.
http://www.socionics.com/sta/sta_turbo.html
I suspect the first dichotomy will provide most trouble :-)
This is where I get confused. I have never been afraid of taking the initiative, it's always been the fact that quite frankly, not much inspires me or motivates me to take the initiative. When i'm in a relationship with someone I really am interested in, I take the initiative all the time...or if I get motivated towards something. It's all about interest, not fear. Aren't most human beings this way? I don't know why that would be E vs I.And not being afraid to take the initiative sounds extratim.
Jessica you are contradicting yourself here:
"I have no motivation for almost everything, etc. The ISTP stereotype of being a lazyass doesn't vibe well with me either"
Having no motivation for anything = lazy ass
if that's true, then what the fuck is fe?
edit: and i sure as hell do not mean "in a theory description way." i mean, tell me what fe looks like IRL interactions!!!
i was super shy most of my life. i've turned that around in my 30s...Good points. Uh oh. More confusion. lol.
I am oblivous...COMPLETELY oblivious as to how others perceive me. Something that sticks out, however, is how many times i get told I have "leadership" qualities because I have a very "serious prescence". I would also assume that indicates a "demanding presence". Everytime someone says that i do a 'Where did that come from?!' My AF recruiter keeps mocking me telling me I'm going to become a drill instructor.
but, when i was in basic, being the flight leader was one of the coolest experiences. i WANTED to become a drill instructor! what kickass fun! the others in my flight didn't "like" me but they respected me and that was way better than "like."
No there is actually a vast difference in how Extraverts and Intraverts percieve the world.
INFp
If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)
I know but I meant when it comes to taking the initiative doesn't one only take the initiative when they're motivated and interested in the outcome? I meant that my initiative taking doesn't have anything to do with fear and i would assume that for most people I or E, its the same. I don't know if that makes sense.
Reply With Quote
