New blog: ENFp: The extroverted schizoid personality?

[consentingadult]

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...rsonality.html

[consentingadult]

Are you sure this is not written from an IEI perspective? It seemed to value Fe>Fi and Ti>Te.

Like I stated at the end: I'm re-evaluating Fe at this current stage in my life. For most of my life, I found people uninteresting, and hence, didn't see much point in establishing deep, firm and affectionate relationships. But a lot of that was just 'pathology', a coping strategy, and holding on to very high (unrelenting) standards when it came to emotional connection that most people weren't able to provide me.

As for Ti>Te, I don't see it in the blog. I don't think it's about Ti or Te at all, can you point out where you see these two reflected and evaluated? I'm curious now

ETA: even nowadays, I often feel like 'friendships' are a waste of time, but things are gradually changing in that respect.

[Simon Ssmall]

ETA: even nowadays, I often feel like 'friendships' are a waste of time, but things are gradually changing in that respect.

Dunno, but I would never say something like that, or that people are uninteresting, I find all people interesting. How deep I get involved depends, but I do have a few friends I'm deeply connected. One way or another I DO find most people interesting and have something to know about them, although I rarely am surprised by them, so maybe that what you refer to as "uninteresting", gets hard to experience something new really. Yet that does not change the fact I am very much interested in them, just maybe in a different way.

[consentingadult]

You wrote this about Fi/Fe:

How is that to re-evaluate Fe? Maybe I misunderstood you? It also seems you are confusing Fi and Fe...?



I see. But it doesn't seem Fi-ego...?




In everything you write, you seem to be looking for patterns (Ni?) and you/your patterns seem to seek understanding (> knowledge). That's what I meant by Ti>Te.

Example:

This is how I understand Fi and Fe: Fe involves a sense of friendship on the emotional level, a capacity to connect with other people, to influence emotions. Fi involves judgment of other people, the capacity to evaluate their behavior from an ethical perspective, to understand that behavior and it motivations, to provide understanding and compassion. I'm taking off the sharp edges of my inclination to evaluate other people's behavior, but also of my tendency to provide empathic understanding to people in some kind of distress. And I try to put friendship, even though it is difficult, on a higher plane.

As for Ni, I do look for patterns, but not as much as I look for similarities and relationships try to see how different perspectives relate to each other (Ne).

As for understanding: I think I'm not seeking understanding, because I think I typically understand things very well, I only often do not know which understanding applies in a situation (in relationship to myself), since multiple possibilities could apply. What keeps me awake at night is not that I do not understand, but that I do not know for sure. So I keep searching for knowledge that would provide the final word, of course, to no avail. Obsessive knowledge gathering: Te mobilizing function, I believe.

[consentingadult]

Dunno, but I would never say something like that, or that people are uninteresting, I find all people interesting. How deep I get involved depends, but I do have a few friends I'm deeply connected. One way or another I DO find most people interesting and have something to know about them, although I rarely am surprised by them, so maybe that what you refer to as "uninteresting", gets hard to experience something new really. Yet that does not change the fact I am very much interested in them, just maybe in a different way.

You are expressing the very sentiments I've held up to three years ago, and very much expressing them using the same wording. Now I see my behaviors and intrinsic believes in a different light.

[consentingadult]

I would never say friends are a waste of time neither, and I do find people in general interesting. However, I (almost) never call/contact people unless I feel a deep connection with them - I tend to "forget" about the others, even if they happen to think of me as a friend or contact me all the time.

...it looks really bad written like that.... It's not that I consciously AVOID them, it's more that I find interacting with them draining.

What do you think makes the interaction draining?

[Simon Ssmall]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Ne is about seeing possibilities. Ni is about seeing how things relate/connect.

Ne is about making connections where you might not see one, it can connect at first sight totally unrelated things into something. Ni is about seeing how situation will develop, evolve, seeing one way how it will be but it is quite different of how Ne connects things/facts/people/events. At least that's how I see it.

[consentingadult]

Fe as I see it is not necessarily about friendship, it's about moods. You use Fe to scan your surroundings - to understand the ambient of places and how people "really" feel (about anything). It also "knows" the current state of any relation you have with anyone.

Think sonars of Dolphins... A dynamic function constantly in use.

I agree, Fe is more than just friendship. But in asfar it is applied to the social realm, what differentiates Fe from Fi, is that Fe is able to establish a connection to another individual without necessarily involving a judgment about another person. In a sense, it's more likely that unconditional love is about Fe more than about Fi. Fi establishes frienship based on like/dislike. Fe valuing types are much better at compromise when trying to establish frienship.

This is to tone down your Fi, I agree. I do this as well, as I really don't like when people are judgmental.

I don't like it when I'm judgmental myself. when I take it too far, I miss out on a lot of good people ;-)

I try to tone this down as well.

Example: With Fe I feel if people are not happy, and my Fi will tell me to try and encourage them. However, I tend to feel so much pain everywhere, I have to stop myself from helping everybody. I have to chose my battles.

Is this what you meant..?

To some extent: I used to feel other people's pain, and thuis took it upon me to relieve that pain. But in doing so, I mostly attracted needy people, people who weren't able to give me in return what I needed. And created depency in the process. I have now learned to reduce it to where I'm able to support other people who are occasionally in need of emotional support, instead of having that need more often than not. People who are able to support me in return. Things are more balanced now.

Is this typical of a Fi-valuing person?

Yes and no: both Fe and Fi valuing persons are trying to bring their relationships to a higher level. But the difference is in the way they go about this: Fe types are more willing to connect and take people as they are, whereas Fi types strive for deeper and deeper motional/spiritual connection. stereotypically speaking Fe frienship is more about being merry, Fi friendship is more about seriousness. I'm trying to be less serious in y friendships, and more merry, although I think I willalways be more of an Fi valuer than an Fe valuer.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Ne is about seeing possibilities. Ni is about seeing how things relate/connect.

I take multiple possibilities and see how they relate, and from that, new possibilities arise. Bot Ne and Ni involve insights into how things relate and connect (both involve processes of abstraction and concept formations), but the difference is that Ni leads to one outcome, whereas Ne leads to multiple outcomes. I can se why people would consider my conclusions as Ni-style conclusions, but I suspect this is because I try to be compact in y writings, and also try to explain things from a Socionic perspective. I would like to write about all the other points of view, but we would then arrive at stories that are so long that no-one would care to read them anymore. I could, in this article, for example, also have written how the very same aspects of my personality could be explained by covert narcissistic attitudes, with equal validity, but for the purposes of this blog, I chose to restrict myself to schizoid aspects of the IEE personality.

You know, I think you describe my Ti hidden agenda almost to perfection. You want to understand how/why/what, so you seek knowledge to make your Ti-system complete.

From Wikisocion:

So to understand, you need "knowledge".

I admit I'm really bad at understanding Ti and Te, but I'll try and explain what I think anyway. Ti is about seeing logical connections between things, just like I think you do??

Check my example of a conversation with a Te-leading person:http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...6&postcount=18

As far as I understand, Te is about "solid" knowledge of OUTER things - it's about complete objective truths. Ti is a system that is subjective. It's your personal explanation of how things relate.

I do not see things the same way you do: the essence of SEIs and IEIs is that they have trouble understanding phenomena and seek out people that could explain these phenomena to them. My SEI gf is constantly bombarding me with questions that should provide her understanding. Once she understands, that's enough to her. ETA: understanding (Te) is enough for her, it does not have to result into action or anything productive (Te).

My problem is not that I do not understand, because I do. I only have difficulty with what I should choose. If I go left, there will be benefits and disadvantages, same thing with turning right. But how do I know what's the right choice? I'm in therapy for two years now. I understand perfectly what's wrong with me, also what I could do to change it, but there is this constant question: am I doing the right thing? and both of the therapists I've had in the past two years, refuse to give me that answer. They want me to choose myself. But if I ask them to explain a phenomenon (i.e. if I ask for understanding), they are very forthcoming and explain things in great detail, and I almost always understand it instantly, as if I had always understood it. Very much like Small said: things are never really surprising.

ETA: in relation to the last paragraph: I feel my therapists know perfectly well that Te is my weak spot, although they do not know about Socionics.

[consentingadult]

Ne is about making connections where you might not see one, it can connect at first sight totally unrelated things into something. Ni is about seeing how situation will develop, evolve, seeing one way how it will be but it is quite different of how Ne connects things/facts/people/events. At least that's how I see it.

Thank you, I couldn't have put it better myself.

[consentingadult]

Not sure...? Probably different values...? It's when I feel I have to keep a polite facade - it drains my energy like nothing else.

Example: It can be a "friend" talking about things I find completely irrelevant in my life, like gossiping about other people. I'll try and listen to be polite, as this is often important for others. Also people tend to perceive me as selfish and not "caring" about other people's problems if I don't listen. I see it more or less the other way around - if I'm not supposed to help people in any way, it feels intrusive to know personal stuff about them. So it's just draining my energy to interact with people who gossip. The paradox is that they probably feel I'm a friend as they tell "secrets" to me.

to me, this sounds more like Fi than Fe.

I'll elaborate: what I think is the essence of leading Fi types is;

1. The ability to empathize with other people, to make them feel like you understand and appreciate them (perhaps even when this is not really the case). This is the positive side of Fi.
2. the tendency to be judgmental and moralistic when evaluating other people's behavior, (and to draw negative conclusions if these are not the same as your own values)

A good example of this is, I think, Sarah Palin, who I believe to be a stereotypical ESI. I saw a report (click 'bekijk item') yesterday on how people in her hometown feel about her, and what stands out is that many people say Sarah understands them. She makes people feel she is on their side. As we all know, you cannot be on everyone's side at the same time, but she's got people lulled into this sense of 'common understanding'. But she's also very moralistic about people that do not share her values (i.e. who do not serve her interests) and uses dirty tactics to discredit them, while at the same time using Ne-POLR (i.e. simply ignoring and denying without arguments) to deny her own unethical dealings. Emotional manipulative moralism.

[consentingadult]

Ne is about making connections where you might not see one, it can connect at first sight totally unrelated things into something. Ni is about seeing how situation will develop, evolve, seeing one way how it will be but it is quite different of how Ne connects things/facts/people/events. At least that's how I see it.

I was just thinking about another way of looking at the difference: Ne seeks to connect parallel phenomena (genus/differentia relationships), whereas Ni seeks to connect serial phenomena (cause/effect relationships)

[consentingadult]

Not sure...? Probably different values...? It's when I feel I have to keep a polite facade - it drains my energy like nothing else.

Example: It can be a "friend" talking about things I find completely irrelevant in my life, like gossiping about other people. I'll try and listen to be polite, as this is often important for others. Also people tend to perceive me as selfish and not "caring" about other people's problems if I don't listen. I see it more or less the other way around - if I'm not supposed to help people in any way, it feels intrusive to know personal stuff about them. So it's just draining my energy to interact with people who gossip. The paradox is that they probably feel I'm a friend as they tell "secrets" to me.

I corect myself: it's indeed not Fi, as Fi valuing individuals would see value in what you seem to have a problem with. At least the first half of your story. The second half, I do not know how to explain it. I do know Beta irrationals typically appreciate straightforwardness and do not like talking behind people's backs (at least when others do it), but I'm not sure if this fits in with what you are describing.

[Simon Ssmall]

Ne is about jumping from one thought to another, so if you call that to "connect", I agree. Ne is a series of thoughts:
a --> b --> c
You jump from object to object.

What I meant about Ni-"connections" is to see patterns in between objects (fields). It's to see how a and b and c interact as a whole.

Ne can also see how they would interact, its just different. They see it one way now, they can see it differently 5 minutes later, they can add random things to an already existing connection. Ni people would most likely distill everything the same way if no new experience has emerged and i see it. Ni most likely knows how a and b will interact most likely based on their experience, Ne would see how a and b can interact in a gazilion of ways, not knowing which is actually true.

[Simon Ssmall]

No. Ne is static (objects at rest). Ni is dynamic (fields in motion). You are describing Ni.

True, when I think about it, You are right.

This is not correct. (Ni is about fields in motion!)

Yes, Ni is about fields in motion, still would you not come up to the same conclusion about how situation will evolve 5 minutes later if NOTHING new happened during that time? I mean the object wasn't really in much motion to begin with. From what I understand Ni people are good at seeing how the situation evolve if they see it differently every time they think about it I doubt they are that good? Fields in motion is just that they react to change, not that they see things differently if there was no change.

From my perspective it seems you have almost turned Ni and Ne around...

Check the descriptions here.

Might be I mixed up some things, some is probably due to bad wording. However when I think about people, I see lots of posibilities why one thing or another could have happened. When I see other IEE's post here, I get the same impression, they can bombard you with reasons why a person acted in one way or another, mentioning lots of them, not one.

[Angel von Himmel]

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...rsonality.html

That was the BEST thing I have read on "iee-extroverted-schizoid-personality" in the longest time ... it is enough to make any "iee-extroverted-schizoid-personality" mother proud of her "iee-extroverted-schizoid-personality" son.

I almost can't read anything else now! I am just BLINDED with the brilliance ...

[Simon Ssmall]

You are comparing it to Ne, and you can't really... Ni is not "a more focused Ne". It's a multi-dimensional sea of motion and internal images. I picture myself sitting in a ship on that sea, and the sea constantly moves, and I move too, and the fishes in the sea move and the wind can change direction and the streams are constantly in motion, etc. So whenever you ask me a question about the future, I will see, like in a sea, things from a new position every time. It means that I must see the answer from new angles every time, as things always move. The answer is still correct.

This is something I have hard time understanding. Will you see the outcome with more angles or will you see another picture altogether? Will the outcome be different 5 minutes later? Or will it be the same just more full?
I seriously have a hard time understanding most of Ni descriptions and when talking with you it didn't get better. I still have a hard time, not your problem of course.

No... oh... you are talking about objects, I suspect? Ni doesn't really look for objects. Fields move constantly as I change internal images all the time. They move with my mood and with your mood, with imagination, logics, predictions, memories, calculations, etc.

Yeh I guess I talk about objects. But I have a hard time sinthesising "fields move constantly" so I'm not sure what or how to ask you more.

I guess Ne sees a lot of different objects leading to new objects in a never ending sequence? Ni sees constantly moving fields between the objects as explained above.

It doesn't nescessary have to be a-> b -> c -> d
It can be a -> b,c,d

Maybe it is objects leading to new objects. But instead of speaking in abstracts lets say... More or less IEE's I know can see a lot of reasons why a person acted in a certain way, when someone says "she is so stupid, she did this and that, why would she do that??", you can see them jumping in and mentioning "well she could have been hurt? she could have had a bad day? maybe her boyfriend left her? maybe she was sick? maybe she is bored of the current situation? maybe she thinks you are hostile? maybe she wanted to make an example?" and things like that. Maybe its the same as objects leading to new objects. Guess it has more to do in seeing potential/ posibilities in an object.

[Simon Ssmall]

Not sure how to explain better. Hope the examples above helped?

They did somewhat, still don't understand what is the actual field and what is an object in the examples you provided. But I guess the way you described Ni in those examples is something I can actually understand, thanks.

"how can I help her?" or "how will it affect me if I help her/if I don't help her".... It all happens so fast that I don't notice the web of thoughts really.

I usually know the answer to "how can I help her?" question, not that I even think about it, I just usually act, automatic more or less. Don't really ever bother about "how will it affect me if I help her/if I don't help her".

Well thanks for the insights, I still doubt I really understand Ni, Ne in most cases is very clear to me while Ni is something that makes me go "what??", not sure if it has to do with descriptions or the function itself.

[Simon Ssmall]

That was the BEST thing I have read on "iee-extroverted-schizoid-personality" in the longest time ... it is enough to make any "iee-extroverted-schizoid-personality" mother proud of her "iee-extroverted-schizoid-personality" son.

I almost can't read anything else now! I am just BLINDED with the brilliance ...

Seems defensive. Pissed you off?

[consentingadult]

I think you don't really understanding Fi and Fe. The way you explain it is wrong, and it makes me feel you have not understood the difference between them. You can't compare the two in how they are applied in the social realm....

Well, I'm glad you understand it all. I'm such an idiot, what was I thinking??

[consentingadult]

Ne is about jumping from one thought to another, so if you call that to "connect", I agree. Ne is a series of thoughts:
a --> b --> c
You jump from object to object.

What I meant about Ni-"connections" is to see patterns in between objects (fields). It's to see how a and b and c interact as a whole.

No, I do not agree, Ne is about making connections when it is the leading function. I know it is popular to think that people who jump from random thought to random thought are ego-Ne types, but these are just hyper or dramatic.

[consentingadult]

I think schizotypal is more of an NTp thing, actually.

I think it is too, but in the post before yours, McNew was talking about schizoid. Not quite the same thing.

[Not A Communist Shill]

This message is endorsed by rmcnew (blame him!).