How strong is the DS function?

[xerx]

How strong is it? How active is it?
Is it willing to accept any input? How discriminating is it?
At any or all levels of development.

discuss.

[xerx]

How strong relative to what?

Why must introverts understand everything in terms of relationships?

[Rubicon]

I suspect that mine's pretty strong in an annoying way. I'll think "Ooh.. I didn't just zoom in on someone's small mistake of reasoning, ignoring everything else that made sense about what they said." Yes, I did. :/

EDIT: Was thinking of HA.. My DS is made of fail, like this post.

[xerx]

Why must be so ambiguous?

fixed

[Creepy-male]

How strong is it? How active is it?
Is it willing to accept any input? How discriminating is it?
At any or all levels of development.

discuss.

I don't think it's really discriminating at all. It can be active to the extent that you try to draw it out of people by talking about it, eg Gul talking about nature, food, colour-coordination, whatever with Isha, or Isha trying to retype Gul ESE because it's still a possible option. I wouldn't say it's strong at all, however.

[Azeroffs]

I don't think it's really discriminating at all. It can be active to the extent that you try to draw it out of people by talking about it

Yeah i think that's about the extent of it. You invite the use of it, but that's about it.

You don't have much awareness of the IE occupying the DS. It's on the same level as the PoLR.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...y_of_functions

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[07490]

And I think if you do realize your vulnerability there, you can be sort of paranoid and suspicious to protect it.

Yea.

[munenori2]

my dual seeking function is stronger than your dual seeking function

[07490]

And I think if you do realize your vulnerability there, you can be sort of paranoid and suspicious to protect it.

When I pay attention closely, I noticed how much "strong Ego" people are slaved by their dual seeking function from others. I mean strong ego as in people with strong 1st and 2nd functions.

The fifth function has great difficulty making sense of information on its own. Information is perceived on the one hand as little understood background noise and on the other hand as something of great importance. The individual feels good when others explain to him what he is experiencing in this aspect of reality and what he should do about it. One’s opinions in this area are easily influenced. Without others’ care and concern one feels like an abandoned child. A person rarely feels ashamed about problems related to his fifth function and can easily request help if he sees that others are self-assured in this area. If others speak with an authoritative tone, one listens carefully to advice having to do with one’s fifth function. One rarely stands up for the fifth function’s interests, but accepts as much help as others are willing to give. Criticism is interpreted as concern for one’s needs. People who lack duals’ concern in this area frequently hint at their fifth function’s helplessness and neediness in the subconscious hope that the right people will respond to their cry for help. Dualization helps to develop the fifth function and make sense of one’s subconscious needs in this area. Self-perfection on one’s own is extremely difficult. If the individual has someone he trusts to follow, he feels happy and protected. Otherwise he feels resentful of society at large for not providing him with the care and assistance he needs.

Surprisingly, and I don't know if my observations hold true, but I think people with stronger Hidden agenda are not as easily influenced by their dual seeking functions.

[silverchris9]

my dual seeking function is stronger than your dual seeking function

My dual seeking function is a fail. I tried to direct a scene in a show once (you know, it had to do with leading people and stuff, so I thought it's kinda of an Se thing...?) and I really couldn't not establish any sort of leadership or control. I mean, I finally got it done, but only by impressing upon my actors that I was going to have a meltdown if they didn't shut up. On the other hand, I had to direct a bunch of high school boys, mostly freshman, so that was probably a significant part of the problem. I also don't have a good theoretical understanding of my dual seeking function, but I don't know whether or not that has anything to do with socionics. I don't deal well with power dynamics and putting up a strong front to people in general, unfortunately. I'm a bit of a pushover, although, again, this may have little to nothing to do with socionics.

[Jarno]

What if you don't have a dual seeking function but only a pussy seeking function instead?

[tiny_dancer]

I'm sure it's terrible, but I can't tell 'cause it's my dual-seeking function.

[Blaze]

the strength of the dual seeking is influenced by whether the DS is a rational or irrational element, as in whether the element is a perceiving element or a producing element. (actually i'm not sure if i have this right or not....check later). example i can't really be sensing no matter how hard i try, i just don't perceive things with crystal clear clarity through the 5 senses. my head is in the intuitive clouds most of the time. on the other hand, i can produce things that are pleasing to the senses pretty easily at this point, since i've learned how (a fine meal, a nicely decorated room, a pleasing scent, a great piece of music) but these things are more like projects than they are like things i naturally do all day long. so DS can be strengthened since the person has the motivation to strengthen it due to it being what they value. but i don't think it would ever equal the strength of someone who has that function in the leading or creative position.

i am not sure if it works the same way for rationals...since their dual seeking functions are rational elements.

[Brilliand]

the strength of the dual seeking is influenced by whether the DS is a rational or irrational element, as in whether the element is a perceiving element or a judging element. (actually i'm not sure if i have this right or not....check later). example i can't really be sensing no matter how hard i try, i just don't perceive things with crystal clear clarity through the 5 senses. my head is in the intuitive clouds most of the time. on the other hand, i can produce things that are pleasing to the senses pretty easily at this point, since i've learned how (a fine meal, a nicely decorated room, a pleasing scent, a great piece of music) but these things are more like projects than they are like things i naturally do all day long. so DS can be strengthened since the person has the motivation to strengthen it due to it being what they value. but i don't think it would ever equal the strength of someone who has that function in the leading or creative position.

i am not sure if it works the same way for rationals...since their dual seeking functions are rational elements.

Fixed... and... I still think this is balanced between Rationals and Irrationals.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Lobo]

How strong is it? How active is it?
Is it willing to accept any input? How discriminating is it?
At any or all levels of development.

discuss.

I think I have a good understanding of Si, though I definitely don't focus on it most of the time as some types tend to do. There are times when I really don't care if my environment or what I'm wearing, etc, is comfortable enough, I just wing it without getting perturbed by it. Also, I don't try to develop Si, as opposed to other functions.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Lobo]

If you're FiNe, your dual-seeking would be Te. For the negative aspects, this might show up as accepting a "well-known" fact without thinking critically about it. Or, taking information at face-value and being misled. One way in which you might seek Te in a positive way and need it, is to look for the objective truth in a situation. Fe would be ignored in favor of Te, so you might like better someone who just says something, lays it out directly without fanfare or emotional input, and may have difficulty with someone who doesn't do that.

Oh, for some reason I thought the thread was about HA . I Must have been really sleepy when I posted... What you said sounds right, but I'd need to give more thought into the subject.

[717495]

I think that I'm about half and half on usage of Si and Se, role and DS, depending on the day. I tend to think I'm strong at Se, but it's far from the truth, when you compare me to other types, like ENTj. If PoLR is 0 or 1, DS must be about 3, but it can go up from there depending on my energy and influence. So it's definitely stronger than PoLR, especially at certain times, respectively. I sort of think our dual has an affect of inspiring their dom function into us and making us more affluent at it from time to time.

[Blaze]

Hmm. I don't think that most people are really very great at providing the DS for themselves regardless of rationality/irrationality. The trappings of it, possibly, but that's different.

I'm thinking of something Mariella said re. her husband when they first started dating. She said that she thought of herself as being "high-maintenance" because the men she'd dated found her needs burdensome to them. But when her husband came along, and she apologized for being high-maintenance he laughed, and told her that she wasn't at all. What she needed was fulfilled by him without much effort on his part - something he found natural.

It's something I think you really do need from other people, which is why you're so vulnerable there. And I think that if you're not around anyone who supplies it, you might even feel bad about yourself for needing it - thinking you're just unbearable or "high-maintenance," in that aspect. You can live without it sure, but I think unless you've developed some very good work-arounds and ways to cope, it'll resurface when in close relationships as a point of contention if it's not there.

yes, this is pretty much what i was getting at. projects=trappings. same thing.

rational vs irrational...i would not comment on how rationals use their DS...what do you think? do you do Te projects diana?

[Blaze]

Fixed... and... I still think this is balanced between Rationals and Irrationals.

how do you see this playing out w rationals then? i don't really know about rationals since i are not one...lol

[717495]

Yeah, to what Diana said, I feel very capable of getting things done in a simple sense, yet I am probably much less capable in a skilled sense than just a sense of initial ability. Much of the time I'm not in any kind of mood to be capable of initial ability either. Se dominants, able to spur action, apply energy into motivating people, tactical advantage of physical influences, and more importantly able to wake me up. I definitely need someone around me to influence me to action with them, it sounds like a perfect match, even though it's technically not 'perfect'.

So I think we're capable of DS, but its more like were capable of 25% DS, rather than not capable at all. We can't possibly go the extra 75%. Say you have a checklist of things to take with you on your trip. Se dom can take all of these things, ILI or IEI can only chose 4 things, but they are capable of it at least. They have something to make use of. They know who to go to when they need the other things. Eventually you become more and more like that person, you'll be able to carry more things, and they will let you borrow them so you can trying carrying them for yourself, but it can be too heavy, so you have your dual at your side to pick you up when you drop yourself.

[ArchonAlarion]

Please define "strong".

For extra credit, explain why your leading element complements your dual seeking element.

I mean, it is obvious that possibilities complement comfort, emotional expression complements structural logic, and trashbins complement african elephants, but...

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[xerx]

Please define "strong".

For extra credit, explain why your leading element complements your dual seeking element.

I mean, it is obvious that possibilities complement comfort, emotional expression complements structural logic, and trashbins complement african elephants, but...

Have you thrown out models altogether?

[ArchonAlarion]

Have you thrown out models altogether?

No.

I just dislike this talk of initiative and facts n shit. Se complements Ni because it is external, objective, and static and Ni is internal, subjective, and dynamic. They are a thesis and antithesis, through which emerges synthesis: the irrational process of Ni/Se.

What does "strong" Se mean? What effect does this strength have on Ni? Why would an Se leading seek Ni leadings or Ni laced information? What is creating this psychological dependency?

No elephants and garbage receptacles please.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[ArchonAlarion]

I believe when you understand socionics like I do, that no longer applies, although I do include the functions in my considerations as well.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[ArchonAlarion]

sorry.

[xerx]

No.

I just dislike this talk of initiative and facts n shit. Se complements Ni because it is external, objective, and static and Ni is internal, subjective, and dynamic. They are a thesis and antithesis, through which emerges synthesis: the irrational process of Ni/Se.

What does "strong" Se mean? What effect does this strength have on Ni? Why would an Se leading seek Ni leadings or Ni laced information? What is creating this psychological dependency?

No elephants and garbage receptacles please.

In the Reinin model:

(((*** Note: before I get criticized on this, I do not advocate using the Reinin dichotomies. I do not believe that Reinin traits empirically exist. I even treat static/dynamic as experimental. I merely make use of the model's mathematical structure. ***)))

Se = the intersection of the sets of traits of ESTps and ESFps.
ESTps and ESFps have ...
Extrovert, Sensing, Irrational, Static, Strategic, Farsighted, Decisive in common.

Ni = the intersection of the sets of traits of INFps and INTps.
INFps and INTps have ...
Introvert, Intuitive, Irrational, Dynamic, Tactical, Farsighted, Decisive in common.

Irrational, Farsighted and Decisive are common in both functions. All 4 types are strong in these traits.

But Extrovert/Introvert, Sensing/intuitive, Static/Dynamic and Strategic/Tactical are different for ESxps and INxps. Since we're working with dichotomies, we have to conclude that strengths and weaknesses do in fact exist.

Static Sensing Extrovert = static externals objects
Dynamic Intuition Introvert = dynamic internal fields
Are therefore dichotomous to each other.

qed.

But I agree with you that the picture is more complicated. There is unconscious(?) feedback from the DS function that supports the base. It's not only a void that has to be filled by a dual, though usually that is the case. But there is something more to it than that I'd like to explore.

[ArchonAlarion]

I am more satisfied with that answer, thank you. I think the DS is latent and elusive. I call it the "source" function because it feels like a hidden well of energy that provides material for my Ne. Like an ever present force or background. Fe is more "activated" like a button that is pushed. Fe catalyzes the progression of Ti, which sets the stage for Ne, but does not affect it directly.

[xerx]

I am more satisfied with that answer, thank you. I think the DS is latent and elusive. I call it the "source" function because it feels like a hidden well of energy that provides material for my Ne. Like an ever present force or background. Fe is more "activated" like a button that is pushed. Fe catalyzes the progression of Ti, which sets the stage for Ne, but does not affect it directly.

It has some mysterious hold over my creativity as well. I think you would probably find a more satisfactory answer reading Jung than studying socionics.

[ArchonAlarion]

why?

[xerx]

why?

Just read it.

[ArchonAlarion]

dude I have read the general descriptions of the types.

[xerx]

dude I have read the general descriptions of the types.

I meant this. It's like 600 pages and has a bunch of cool stuff that didn't make it into socionics.

[ArchonAlarion]

Dude I read... alot of that. Jung is a bit long winded and I avoided what I felt was irrelevent.

If I was to read Jung again it'd prolly be on his archetypes and non-type stuff.

What besides the general descriptions of the types did you find relevent?

[xerx]

Dude I read... alot of that. Jung is a bit long winded and I avoided what I felt was irrelevent.

If I was to read Jung again it'd prolly be on his archetypes and non-type stuff.

What besides the general descriptions of the types did you find relevent?

nm.