Dispelling the myth that LIIs are weak

[The Exception]

User:Tcaudilllg/LIIs - Will the Real LIIs Please Stand Up: Dispelling myths about the LII type and the persons disposed to it - Wikisocion


Interesting article. Discuss.

[Creepy-male]

My first impression:



This quickly led to MORE DOTS.

But I digress. I actually have nothing to contribute to this thread.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Sorry but I struggle to read things that tcaudilllg writes; it seems like he is preaching at me and challenging me to disagree with him, rather than writing something which guides me in a way where I think I am making my own mind up.

I don't think LII's are weak in comparison to say, ILI's, as the LII's Se *concious* function flares up every so often.

The EII being an ethical type, is less likely to flare up the same way as an LII. My experience of EII's is that their defiance manifests in a more reserved way. They may not make an external fuss but vow quietly to themselves not to loose, often over things that don't really matter

The LII tends to be more vocal in such situations, which I think is due to them being an ego function logical type and therefore less able to assess how they can come across in comparison to EII's, typically, so therefore their Se PoLR comes across differently.

I would say, see Niffweed showing examples of an LII's Se PoLR as a for instance.

[JWC3]

*audible screams are heard as JWC3 mercilessly crushes his supervisies PoLR* I'm sorry I couldn't hear you it's kinda loud in here.

But srsly LII's aren't weak, they are very very weird but at the same time funny and awesome. Not weak though. Least in my uninformed opinion they aren't.

[BlackCat]

I think it's ridiculous to think that all LIIs are physically weak... socionics is a PERSONALITY typing system. You can't rely on VI this much... this is just taking it too far and making it a retarded stereotype. Honestly who can actually take this idea seriously? That every single LII is physically weak? Ugh... it's just so stupid.

I know plenty of LIIs who aren't physically weak (A lot of my friends are LII). Yes I've verified through socionics that they are LII. One LII I know has a stocking job, he's big and he's pretty strong. Not a weak guy at all. Another LII I know makes money by doing odd jobs, he's pretty averagely build but not weak. I could continue on...

God this is just such a retarded stereotype.

[Creepy-male]

Of course, niffweed's typing is controversial and should thus not be used as an example of LII Se PoLR.

I think I will lock in ESE now.

[electric sheep]

I prefer to look at the PoLR as more of a blindness than a weakness. I wouldn't say I'm weak. I think the fact that this dude has to write an extensive article using all kinds of bizarre language reinforces that stereotype. If I wanted to prove that I was a strong person, I wouldn't give a lecture about it or write a paper on it--I would do something like bungee jumping, or pick a fight with someone. But then again, if you have to prove that you are a strong person, that could just mean you are weak at heart.

Getting back to the PoLR, I see it as more of a blindness than anything else. I have no problem defending myself. The problem is with identifying threats. Am I seeing threats that aren't there, or am I ignoring a threat that is in front of my face? Once I can identify a threat clearly enough, the rest is easy.

[Creepy-male]

Actually, tcaudill is LSI. I don't know if he thought he was LII at that stage though?

EDIT

Or if he's even LSI.

/shrug

[Creepy-bg]

you have to understand that when tcaud writes something, he is writting to the voices in his head- not to the forum. I suspect that his EIE type was berrating his LII type while his LSI type was just sitting there eyeing himself chillingly, so he had to write this little manifesto in order to rally up his ESE, LSE, SLE, SEE, and ESI types to defend himself from himself.

[Mea]

it depends what you mean by weak, like in what way, doesn't it?

[The Exception]

I have no problem being firm when necessary, the problem is when others won't listen to reason. For example, in the library where I work, there are the occasional people who will talk really loudly, butt ahead in line, and engage in other disrespectful behaviors. I have no problem at all approaching them and telling them they are behaving disrespectfully and explaining to them why the rules of conduct exist for the library and if they continue to behave in that manner they will be asked to leave. Most library patrons comply but once in a while, there will be someone who just doesn't want to listen to reason but instead acts in a very angry manner. When the patrons act like this, it scares me and I think it might be a subconscious fear that the patron might do something violent even
if that's not their intention. I then have this inner debate about whether I should just give into them because then they'll stop being so angry but if I give into them it just might cause further problems down the road and then I'll feel weak for letting someone walk over me.

Do you think this relates to PoLR?

[munenori2]

you have to understand that when tcaud writes something, he is writting to the voices in his head- not to the forum. I suspect that his EIE type was berrating his LII type while his LSI type was just sitting there eyeing himself chillingly, so he had to write this little manifesto in order to rally up his ESE, LSE, SLE, SEE, and ESI types to defend himself from himself.

[jason_m]

I didn't read the article, but my lack of assertiveness and disliking of confrontations are probably some of the main reasons why I consider myself to be LII.

Jason

[electric sheep]

I didn't read the article, but my lack of assertiveness and disliking of confrontations are probably some of the main reasons why I consider myself to be LII.

Jason

You're looking at the wrong traits. Stop defining yourself by your weaknesses.

[Logos]

I define myself by who I am as a person, which includes my strengths and my weaknesses. So do not tell me how I should be defining myself with this glass half-full nonsense.

[electric sheep]

I define myself by who I am as a person, which includes my strengths and my weaknesses. So do not tell me how I should be defining myself with this glass half-full nonsense.

I don't think that was directed at you... and I don't think you figured out what type you were based on superficial nonsense like being conflict averse.

[Logos]

I don't think that was directed at you... and I don't think you figured out what type you were based on superficial nonsense like being conflict averse.

Not in full.

[jason_m]

You're looking at the wrong traits. Stop defining yourself by your weaknesses.

If you're saying that I've defined myself entirely in terms of my weaknesses, then my question to you is who said that I actually did that? On the other hand, if you're saying that I determined my personality in part because of my weaknesses, then what would be wrong with that, given that Model A allows aspects of one's weaknesses to be incorporated into it?

Jason

EDIT: And when I said that it was one of my main reasons for thinking that I'm an LII, I didn't mean that there were only one or two.

[electric sheep]

If you're saying that I've defined myself entirely in terms of my weaknesses, then my question to you is who said that I actually did that? On the other hand, if you're saying that I determined my personality in part because of my weaknesses, then what would be wrong with that, given that Model A allows aspects of one's weaknesses to be incorporated into it?

Jason

EDIT: And when I said that it was one of my main reasons for thinking that I'm an LII, I didn't mean that there were only one or two.

If you are an LII, you might be conflict averse.
If you are conflict averse, you could be any number of types. It depends on why you are conflict averse. Are you afraid of hurting people's feelings? Do you lack self confidence? Have you had bad experiences? There are many reasons why someone can be conflict averse, and having an PoLR is very low on the list.

If you say it is one of the main reasons you thought you were LII, I apologize, I'm assuming one can't have more than a few main reasons to believe something. I mean, if you had a lot of main reasons, then they would just be reasons.

[jason_m]

If you are an LII, you might be conflict averse.
If you are conflict averse, you could be any number of types. It depends on why you are conflict averse. Are you afraid of hurting people's feelings? Do you lack self confidence? Have you had bad experiences? There are many reasons why someone can be conflict averse, and having an PoLR is very low on the list.

If you say it is one of the main reasons you thought you were LII, I apologize, I'm assuming one can't have more than a few main reasons to believe something. I mean, if you had a lot of main reasons, then they would just be reasons.

I have about six to ten reasons in terms of the functions and the general features of my intertype relationships that explain why I think I'm an LII. In terms of being Se-PoLR, I've noticed that I don't like being around SEEs or SLEs because they can be aggressive - I associate this behaviour with being open to creating conflict. These are the people I have the hardest time being around, and their behaviour is most opposite to mine, so, as a result, I consider myself Se-PoLR - and, by the same token, one who doesn't like conflict.

Even some of the descriptions on Wikisocion attribute conflict avoidance to Se as a PoLR function:

"If the LII has a problem that cannot be solved intellectually, but requires direct personal confrontation, he may resort to total avoidance rather than approaching the person directly, which he tends to think will produce only frustration and contempt. The LII thinks that, in an ideal world, everyone would just listen to reason instead of insisting on having their own way."

"He tends to avoid intruding on others' space or engaging in behavior that may be perceived as coercive, and tries hard to handle his needs by being disciplined and well-prepared himself - rather than relying on others to do things for him."

I think the problem with that article is that Anthony Caudill is probably not LII. I'm not sure what his type is, but Rick DeLong (who is perhaps the most knowledgeable socionist in North America) has him as an LSI.

Jason

[Creepy-bg]

I'd like to publicly state that Anthony Caudill is an eccentric.

[Creepy-male]

I'd like to publicly state that Anthony Caudill is an eccentric.

We agree.

No you don't

SHUTUPSHUTUP

Guys, calm down, jeez.