Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: The LII and Life

  1. #1
    Creepy-male

    Default The LII and Life

    So alternative models aside.... I was viewing model A and trying to type myself.... I am about 90% sure I am a LII. But after reading the description I feel distressed.

    Let me illustrate what I mean.....

    THE POSITIVES OF BEING AN LII (strengths)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    Being intelligent, highly perceptive of logical principles, critical, analytical, concise, and conclusive. They are likely to even be the typical character who disregards authority and experts, instead opting to search for their own understandings and conclusions... ocassionally they are right and are considered to be ahead of their time or brilliant. Can turn abstract speculation into concrete conclusions. Considers multiple things and viewpoints. Focuses on the big picture. Stays on the point. Capable of using logical facts and observations as tools to develop logical principles. Has active imagination, and considers how one thing may effect another, being concious of cause/effect.

    Basically the LII is a personality who strength lies in their theoretical mind. More conclusive and concise the ILI, more withdrawn and investigative than the LIE, more concentrated and severe than the ILE.


    THE NEGATIVE OF THE LII (weaknesses)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Usually tries to uphold proper conventions of behavior not to offend or alienate people or themselves, sometimes being overly politically correct and formal. At other times they analyze and criticize very bluntly and without regard to conventions or behavior, alienating other people and appearing harsh. Doesn't like to be pushed, forced, or ordered to do something. Some consider his viewpoints overly ideal and impractical, too ivory tower, and not applicable to reality. Disconnected with his feelings, values, and subjective impression in spontaneous public situations. Tends to have negative emotions bottled up in him and is at a loss to find a release for these due to ignoring them. Not aware of physical well being and hygene. Annoyed by sensory over stimulation. Indulges in sensory needs heavily then neglects them heavily.

    Basically the LII is a complete outsider who is out of touch with the physical world and reality and is seen as harsh, severe, overly serious, and cold.

    ================================================== ============

    My distress about this is that it seems as though the LII is a broken person. They are capable of reaching high aspirations in the world of theoretical knowledge... but they fail miserably short in the world of reality and people. Model A would even claim that while an LII can direct energy towards developing their weaknesses, the fact is, it will always come at a greater effort and cost than other types who excel in these areas.

    I would feel good at that point, considering that I can develop my weaknesses, and considering that other types that excel at what I do have weaknesses in my key areas.... but the fact of the matter is I hold people with more value than theoretical knowledge.... I am just interested in ideas and logical systems -- but I don't value these over people. So in that sense it kind of seems like the LII gets the short end of the stick.

  2. #2
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carla View Post
    I don't smell.

    (The rest of those weaknesses hold for me but I don't care . Well, I mean, everyone has weaknesses and everyone has strengths.)
    lol well I don't either.... but they say that on some resources because is in the Super-Id block.

    I understand everyone has weaknesses and strengths, but I don't like how they define the strengths and weaknesses.

    Generally when I ponder the idea of strengths and weaknesses, its inspiring for me to consider that people use their strengths to make up for their weaknesses. So that people aren't really nessicarily feeble or incompetent, but instead they must learn to utilize their unique strengths to manage their weakness.... its a matter of applying their personal style to life.

    However the description of LII makes it sound hopeless, like "In regards to your strengths, you will find a constant effortless stream of success" and "In regards to your weaknesses, you will find a constant stream of failure regardless of your efforts". To me it would seem more appropriate to say LII must learn to use their to make up for their defficiencies in other areas.

    For example the PoLR is in .... so I think the self-development of a LII would be concerned with using to understand the how to use what little utility they have with to its maximum efficiency. In this way they are not nessicarily "bad" with but their needs alot of energy put into it to function succesfully. Further you could apply this to the social circle by noting that each type-type relation can offer something to each other.... rather than saying X type and Y type are natural enemies because one's leading function is the other's PoLR..... it could be that X and Y could make powerful allies, assisting each other in their area of natural weakness, but their is likely to be alot of friction before this relationship is established.

    Even in the above realization about social circles I feel as though I am using a combination of and .... ultimately its but the analysis is in regard to issues.... so this analysis serves as the leading function assisting the role function for an LII.

    By constrast... a EII uses their as their machinery to patch up their perceived short comings with ..... the most likely method would be to consider which parts of life are worth analyzing and which are not. The LII by constrast would analyze life to find which parts of it are valuable. But this is just an example.... and more fundamentally share a universal pyshic interlink in all individuals, but its our strengths and weaknesses that place the focus on this interlink.
    Last edited by male; 09-29-2009 at 11:31 AM.

  3. #3
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carla View Post
    I don't think that you'll ever really, fully defeat your PoLR.
    Yea but I am not talking about defeating you PoLR, but I am talking about managing your PoLR..... that is a different story. I think your PoLR will always define a weakness, because its impossible to have strengths without having weaknesses. The key is to learn how to utilize your strengths to manage that weakness.

    That is what I am saying.... alot of the descriptions make it sound like..... Strengths=Area of Effortless Success, Weakness=Area of Hopeless Failure

  4. #4
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    My distress about this is that it seems as though the LII is a broken person. They are capable of reaching high aspirations in the world of theoretical knowledge... but they fail miserably short in the world of reality and people. Model A would even claim that while an LII can direct energy towards developing their weaknesses, the fact is, it will always come at a greater effort and cost than other types who excel in these areas.

    I would feel good at that point, considering that I can develop my weaknesses, and considering that other types that excel at what I do have weaknesses in my key areas.... but the fact of the matter is I hold people with more value than theoretical knowledge.... I am just interested in ideas and logical systems -- but I don't value these over people. So in that sense it kind of seems like the LII gets the short end of the stick.
    Yes, we suck in a lot of ways. This is why God invented ESEs.
    Quaero Veritas.

  5. #5
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Yes, we suck in a lot of ways. This is why God invented ESEs.
    the funny part is that when God invented ESEs he made sure that they'd suck ( <--) in a lot of ways too :wink:

  6. #6
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bionicgoat View Post
    the funny part is that when God invented ESEs he made sure that they'd suck ( <--) in a lot of ways too :wink:



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  7. #7
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brilliand View Post
    yeah sorry lol. that was maybe a keep to myself joke

  8. #8
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You're all quite pessimistic really, aren't you?

  9. #9
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuturututu View Post
    You're all quite pessimistic really, aren't you?
    I prefer pragmatic its the intersection between optimism and pessimism


  10. #10
    intjguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hell.
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I fucking hate people. All they do is bring me drugs and bullshit.
    In no way should one act contrary to the great future you have before you.

  11. #11
    constant change electric sheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,296
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Everyone has weaknesses, the point is to be charismatic and confident enough in your strengths so that you attract people that want to support your visions and goals. They will cover for your weaknesses. That's how you succeed.
    The saddest ESFj

    ...

  12. #12
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,097
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuturututu View Post
    You're all quite pessimistic really, aren't you?
    Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

  13. #13
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fear of sleep View Post
    Everyone has weaknesses, the point is to be charismatic and confident enough in your strengths so that you attract people that want to support your visions and goals. They will cover for your weaknesses. That's how you succeed.
    OK well thats part of what I am saying.... Thinkers have weakness in feeling and Feelers have weakness in thinking. So la de da, in a perfect ideal world we say the thinkers seek out feelers to make up for their lack in that area and the feelers seek out thinkers to make up for their lack in that area. But I think feeling is more fundamentally desirable in relationships than thinking, people seek out others based on feeling.... so it seems like the feelers have the more valuable strength. Plus something about feeling seems just more fundamental, primal, or true to who a person is. Thinking doesn't seem to make a person who they are.... its more of a skill a person has that allows them to approach life competently.

  14. #14
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    OK well thats part of what I am saying.... Thinkers have weakness in feeling and Feelers have weakness in thinking. So la de da, in a perfect ideal world we say the thinkers seek out feelers to make up for their lack in that area and the feelers seek out thinkers to make up for their lack in that area. But I think feeling is more fundamentally desirable in relationships than thinking, people seek out others based on feeling.... so it seems like the feelers have the more valuable strength. Plus something about feeling seems just more fundamental, primal, or true to who a person is. Thinking doesn't seem to make a person who they are.... its more of a skill a person has that allows them to approach life competently.
    Different traits are more aptly suited to the success of individuals in different environments.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  15. #15
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,097
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    OK well thats part of what I am saying.... Thinkers have weakness in feeling and Feelers have weakness in thinking. So la de da, in a perfect ideal world we say the thinkers seek out feelers to make up for their lack in that area and the feelers seek out thinkers to make up for their lack in that area. But I think feeling is more fundamentally desirable in relationships than thinking, people seek out others based on feeling.... so it seems like the feelers have the more valuable strength. Plus something about feeling seems just more fundamental, primal, or true to who a person is. Thinking doesn't seem to make a person who they are.... its more of a skill a person has that allows them to approach life competently.
    If you truly believe feeling to over-value thinking, doesn't that make you a feeler?
    If I thought feeling was > thinking I would've started feeling a long time ago.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    547
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've never been fond of this idea that one has to be/is specialized for something in particular, and needs someone else to "cover up" what they are horrible at. If I could choose, I'd rather be "well-rounded" rather than having a blatant weakness in some area.

  17. #17
    Erk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    287
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You do not need Se if you have Ne. It is like coming to a fork in the road where both roads lead to same destination but go different directions. One person will always believe their route to be the best, and will be proficient at defending that route.

  18. #18
    constant change electric sheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,296
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xkj220 View Post
    I've never been fond of this idea that one has to be/is specialized for something in particular, and needs someone else to "cover up" what they are horrible at. If I could choose, I'd rather be "well-rounded" rather than having a blatant weakness in some area.
    Yea, I guess if you're too careless and too ignorant of your own faults people would get tired of it pretty fast. My point was really to not let some weakness keep you from moving forward. You gotta go with what you got, right?
    The saddest ESFj

    ...

  19. #19
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    547
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fear of sleep View Post
    Yea, I guess if you're too careless and too ignorant of your own faults people would get tired of it pretty fast. My point was really to not let some weakness keep you from moving forward. You gotta go with what you got, right?
    True, one has to know their limitations. But let's assume there was a way to raise this weakness to at least bearable levels so that at least it is possible to maintain autonomy, and not require the assistance of anyone in the area of such weakness. I'd clearly choose autonomy over dependence.

  21. #21
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    Different traits are more aptly suited to the success of individuals in different environments.
    Exactly..... lets take a simple example and introduce the theory of natural selection into this....

    It would be completely pointless to be using over in a sexual relationship.... it would be counterproductive to the evolution and survival of a species if in a particular situation/environment they didn't adapt and use different functions..... Lets say a sabertooth tiger jumps out and attacks a human.... it wouldn't be evolutionarily sound for the person to use or and consider what the possible evolution of events or outcomes are, it would make more sense (in an evolutionary prespective) for the person to haul ass or fight the thing and use

    I think model A is brilliant... but I think it can only be applied on a very broad, long time scale

    When you try to apply to it to a distinct situation its confounding and your likely to just produce a bunch of nonsense in your thinking if you try....

    for this reason I have issues with model A.

  22. #22
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    If you truly believe feeling to over-value thinking, doesn't that make you a feeler?
    If I thought feeling was > thinking I would've started feeling a long time ago.
    lol well that's what confuses me.....

    I mean feeling is fundamentally the realm of assigning value to things.... thinking is fundamentally the realm of considering the "most efficient" way to things..... but you can't value that efficiency if you don't feel and in an objective sense their is efficiency to considering what you value. The two are intimately interlinked and can't be broken into sections.... I don't think it really works like thinking/feeling are separate "boxes".... I think its just an idealization to describe people. I think a more strict approach to this is to say a person has a predisposition to consider things from one perspective more conciously than the other.... but both perspectives play into any personality regardless.

  23. #23
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xkj220 View Post
    I've never been fond of this idea that one has to be/is specialized for something in particular, and needs someone else to "cover up" what they are horrible at. If I could choose, I'd rather be "well-rounded" rather than having a blatant weakness in some area.
    Yea lol, in some ways I agree....

    but to me its really just as simple as this

    I want to be good at the things I care to be good at
    The things I don't care to be good at, I am indifferent to my skill in them

  24. #24
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Erk View Post
    You do not need Se if you have Ne. It is like coming to a fork in the road where both roads lead to same destination but go different directions. One person will always believe their route to be the best, and will be proficient at defending that route.
    Yea but if they both lead to the same destination then ultimately the are connected and because they are connected they share a common "destination".... and what is that "Destination?".... what is the common destination of and

  25. #25
    Erk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    287
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Object.

  26. #26
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Erk View Post
    The Object.
    ? just ?

    Wtf are you talking about?

Posting Permissions

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