Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: Functions as Valued and Unvalued

  1. #1
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Functions as Valued and Unvalued

    Valued functions are the lens through which we naturally perceive reality, the structure that we subordinate our perceptions to and seek to act on.

    Unvalued functions are the aspects of reality that we take for granted or assume, things that operate as natural "behind the scenes" contexts or operations; they are implicit when using our valued functions.

    For instance, Se perceives the world as discrete objects, each physical thing denoting its own tautological existence as the psychic emphasis of the observer. But in order to perceive things through the lens of Se, we assume that, within this object, certain processes operate that give it continuity or substance. Thus, perceiving the physical world as objects assumes or takes for granted that certain physical processes underly its existence. Conversely, perceiving the world through Si, physical fields, assumes that the interactions and processes take place between discrete objects which are assumed to occupy and compose the field.

  2. #2
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it's more accurate to state that the strong but unvalued functions are assumed and taken for granted. Fe assumes Fi and Ni assumes Ne and vice versa. But I don't think that the weak but unvalued functions, for me, Te and Si are really something that I assume. I think it's more accurate to state that I understand them only on their most fundamental level, only on the level that it's necessary to understand them to make sense of reality period, Te moreso than Si. I understand my internal sensory vibe alright and can make progress in that area, but I can't make heads or tails of Te.

    I'm not quite sure I was clear in what I meant, so I may come back and clean it up later.
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  3. #3
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm not really focusing on what is "assumed," because yes, psychologically, we do sort of naturally take care of things related to our Id block without really thinking about it. What I'm focusing on is the operational difference between valued and unvalued functions, how they work both together and in contrast to one another.

  4. #4
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with this. Re: Se assuming Si, it's somewhat like an implicit antagonism: Se and Si cannot work in concert, because their operation and implied purposes diverge: the former disrupts the latter, while the latter smothers the former.

    So, I tend to think that, for example, Se assumes Ni, because whenever the magnitudes of isolated, tangible objects are gauged, the presupposition is that the relevancy of the individual variables allows for the crystallization of an underlying process.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  5. #5
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't agree with the idea that elements are used in compliments all the time. I think lumping ego/super-id into valued and super-ego/id into unvalued is a big generalization. I don't think we see reality through valued elements.

    I think we see reality through ego elements, we stumble upon and struggle with our super-ego elements, we are largely unaware of super-id elements, and we assume id elements.

    Further, I don't think 'unvalued' elements are unvalued, just undervalued or of lower priority.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  6. #6
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  7. #7
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    I disagree. At least the Super-Ego type of information is subdued, it's harmful and often negated. The Super-Id is just something there, with no value, the type is not opposed to use that, just it has something better. I can't see this as a scale as long as each block information has a different designation.
    If the super-ego elements serve no use, then why do they cause us stress? Even descriptions say that we strive to be good at our role function but can't quite get there and try to overcompensate our PoLR. Besides, every element has value, why would anyone want to shut out something of value. The focus on one element means that others will be subdued, but that doesn't necessarily mean we dislike that element. For example, serious types won't go out of their way to shut down Fe-atmospheres. xEEs will actually create it, ExI indifferent to it, LxE upholds it when convenient, and xLI is mostly just oblivious to it. No where does it say anywhere that types will try to shut down any subdued elements. They may do it inadvertently through an opposing element, but their goal isn't to shut down the subdued element. It's just to uphold their valued element.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  8. #8
    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 Azeroffs View Post
    I don't agree with the idea that elements are used in compliments all the time. I think lumping ego/super-id into valued and super-ego/id into unvalued is a big generalization. I don't think we see reality through valued elements.

    I think we see reality through ego elements, we stumble upon and struggle with our super-ego elements, we are largely unaware of super-id elements, and we assume id elements.

    Further, I don't think 'unvalued' elements are unvalued, just undervalued or of lower priority.
    I concur, especially with the bolded part. I can understand the need for Te efficiency and productivity, I'm just far more interested in systematically analyzing things with Ti. Likewise, I do want to be good at my Super-Ego functions, but they're so weak that using them often causes pain, so I avoid them when I can -- which produces a sense of guilt if I avoid them when I know I should be using them (being rude and producing negative Fi because I'm tired and don't want to exert myself that much causes me to feel guilty in proportion to the magnitude of the offense).
    Quaero Veritas.

  9. #9
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  10. #10
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I disagree, Pinocchio, at least within the context that I have established. Super-Id functions are how we naturally expect other people to think, the parts of the self we relegate or secede to the "other." What I'm talking about is the basic psychological assumption that is made in the use of any function.

  11. #11
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What I am speaking of is not an assumption in the sense that we make active assumptions, but rather in the manner that seeing one side of a coin assumes that the other exists, something that, while it is an objective tautology of sorts, is essentially overlooked in the process of choosing one over the other; hence, "assumed."

    For example, to assert the validity any static framework or raw perception, it is assumed that something is "behind" what is observed, giving it continuity and maintaining its existence; conversely, to observe any dynamic process is to assume that there is not only motion and activity, but also substance that "is moved" to comprise the dynamic action.

  12. #12
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  13. #13
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wouldn't say they are "accepted;" read my above post http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post611747

  14. #14
    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 Pinocchio View Post
    @Krig the Viking: pfff... yeah man, go for it. I was actually expecting this from you. What you say has no connection with your type, but with society prejudices. If they say that you should be a successful manager you'll feel a looser as whatever other job you got, no matter of functions and types. Get real.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    Maybe I don't understand what you mean, but Super-Ego IEs are something anyone disagrees with, scorns, hates and so on. Neither accomplishments of someone else based on them are valued, they are perceived as crap (the natural accomplishments of your Conflictor is complete crap good to be burned, agree?).
    I think your views on this matter are overly simplistic. Societal pressure does play a role, obviously: primarily, communication with people who value your unvalued functions a) creates a negative response when you make mistakes in your Super-Ego functions (whether directly by a rebuke, or indirectly by feeling guilty for hurting someone), and b) creates a positive response when you use your Super-Ego functions well (whether by direct praise, or by feeling satisfaction due to helping someone).

    Your contention is that Super-Ego elements are hated and scorned. That may be true for some people, but it's demonstrably not true for all people. I, for one, do not hate or scorn my Super-Ego elements, or any elements. All are valuable in some way; just because I'm not very good at using them and they tend to cause me pain does not mean they are not valuable. I can see the value in Fi as much as I can see the value in Ti. I simply prefer to use those elements which I am comfortable with, and do not cause me pain. I can find my Conflictor's achievements impressive, even if I find interacting with him unpleasant.

    The real question is, why does the valued/unvalued dichotomy exist at all? As I understand it, it's simply a result of function strength and focus. Ego and Super-Ego functions represent opposite approaches to the same subject matter: Base vs. Role, and Creative vs. Vulnerable. Therefore, one has to make a choice as to which one to focus on. Since the Ego functions are strong, they're easier to use and tend to produce better results, which causes a positive feedback loop. On the other hand, the Super-Ego functions are weak, so using them is difficult and they tend to produce poor results, causing a negative feedback loop. Pavlovian responses being what they are, we tend to shun the things that produce negative stimuli, and gravitate towards those things which produce positive stimuli. Therefore, we value our Ego and supress our Super-Ego.

    However, it is impossible to avoid the Super-Ego entirely. Roughly half the people we meet will value those elements, and a quarter will be strong in them. There are two possible reactions to this: double down and try even harder to avoid the Super-Ego at all costs (this is probably equivalent to the "hate and scorn" response you described, Pinocchio), or focus on self-improvement and try to become stronger in your Super-Ego functions, in an attempt to make fewer mistakes and avoid as much negative feedback as possible (this is the path I've taken). Actually, there is also a third possible reaction: find your Dual and let her take care of those elements for you.

    Presumably, a similar process happens in the Vital Ring, but I haven't worked out all the details.
    Quaero Veritas.

  15. #15
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  16. #16
    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 Pinocchio View Post
    @Krig the Viking: the Ego and Super-Ego functions antithetical IEs. Whatever type you are, to use one you have to deny the other. In that example with the police catching someone, using Ne (eg. interrogation) implies refusing Se (eg. the apparent).
    Yes, exactly. Like I said, they represent opposite approaches to the same subject matter.
    Quaero Veritas.

  17. #17
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  18. #18
    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 Pinocchio View Post
    So how do you explain your previous post that each one can use and value even unvalued (as in Model A) function. You seem to not have a deep understanding in the functions and take them too lightly.
    I can see the value of my suppressed functions in a general sense, even if they're "unvalued" in a specific socionics sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    Ask God, if you have a problem with that. Not that I'm interested in your phantasmagoria, but are you deprived of sleep or something?
    Dude, you're free to disagree with me if you want, but is it really necessary to mock me? Especially since you haven't shown how I'm wrong.
    Quaero Veritas.

  19. #19
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request
    Last edited by Pied Piper; 02-14-2010 at 10:47 PM. Reason: deleted some parts to avoid confusion

  20. #20
    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 Pinocchio View Post
    You showed yourself that you're wrong, in the context of Model A, which you insist you agree with.
    The valued/unvalued dichotomy is accepted by the convention of using the same framework, if you take on most of my posts with such bullshit how else should I deal with you?

    You seem to have put a lot of effort in that post to explain what's your view, but still when something's wrong I don't accept it to be imposed upon me. I'll read it again to check what you meant, though.
    ---

    There is no such thing as "more or less valued" or "work on it". Super-Ego elements are what you're not, your antithesis. Can't you comprehend this, you can't work on it because you have to work against what you are.

    Conclusive example: if you're someone who works on developing his weak points, you can't at the same time be someone who doesn't work on developing his weak points, it's simply absurd. This is your problem, you take things as they'd be task you're good at or not, but in reality all this valued/unvalued it's about view on life and everything. This is what antithesis means, don't take the term lightly.

    Just consider an interaction, a war or something, eg Russians vs Germans. You can't be both, you are one and if you decide to be the other you're not the previous anymore, get what I mean? The Super-Ego is simply "against you", does someone work against him/herself deliberately? Well no, with some exceptions.

    Does this make sense for you?
    I understand what you mean, I just think you're wrong. "Unvalued" simply means "not preferred", not "hated and scorned" or "antithesis" as you're using the term.

    My position on this is pretty standard, as far as I can tell -- even if I'm wrong, as you contend, it's certainly not an absurd position. See the description here: Quadra - Wikisocion

    And Rick DeLong's article on developing the Super-Ego here: Socionics :: Developing the Super-Ego
    Quaero Veritas.

  21. #21
    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 Pinocchio View Post
    @Krig the Viking: the Ego and Super-Ego functions antithetical IEs. Whatever type you are, to use one you have to deny the other. In that example with the police catching someone, using Ne (eg. interrogation) implies refusing Se (eg. the apparent).
    Hmm... in a previous article-like thread that was received rather well (http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...functions.html), I expressed the view that i.e. is antithetical to and is antithetical to , as opposed to i.e. being antithetical to . Superego functions are feared because they interfere with what you already lack, that is your superid; id functions are not feared because while they're a threat, they're a threat that you can face (because your ego functions are strong enough to counter them).



    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

  22. #22
    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 Brilliand View Post
    Hmm... in a previous article-like thread that was received rather well (http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...functions.html), I expressed the view that i.e. is antithetical to and is antithetical to , as opposed to i.e. being antithetical to . Superego functions are feared because they interfere with what you already lack, that is your superid; id functions are not feared because while they're a threat, they're a threat that you can face (because your ego functions are strong enough to counter them).
    I've been thinking a lot about this lately -- (continuing with the Ti example) Ti seems to "compete" with both Fi and Te, in different ways. Or to put it another way, Fe is the only rational function that doesn't compete with Ti. I'm still thinking through this, but so far I'm wondering if it's significant that while Ti and Fe are opposite on all three "aspects" (external statics of fields vs. internal dynamics of objects), Ti and Te are the same on one (external statics of fields vs. external dynamics of objects) and Ti and Fi are the same on two (external statics of fields vs. internal statics of fields). However, that doesn't explain why Ti and Se, for example, work together fine (external statics of fields vs. external statics of objects).

    No conclusions yet; just thought I'd post that in case anyone has any ideas.
    Quaero Veritas.

  23. #23
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  24. #24
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  25. #25
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  26. #26
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's subjective moral offenses. Other people just 'get you' and understand you and other people don't. They just do not agree with your lifestyle or anything that you're doing, cause it's a clash of values. It's not so much 'what you're doing' as 'how you're doing it' but what you're doing is also related to how you're doing it, so it is kinda that.

    Ahem. We see this all the time. Other people will root for you and stick up for you and other people want to see you suffer, Not just suffer though - You just don't exist to them, the true you internal subjective magical you that you just want people to love and you feel you should be liked for being yourself but it doesn't work that way and you can never be everything to everybody, just a few of them.

    The more you're advocating for how somebody is internally the more you are meshing with their true self and the more of an unconditional, healthy relationship it is based on the common sense that nobody is going to change for anybody else. No matter how much they like somebody, they will put some concentrated effort in - but there is the 'you' you can't change, and socionics quite well describes this subjective phenomenon.

    But yeah you're right, interacting with the world requires a lot of sacrifice I think, but I do think this is easier depending on the functions said society values.

  27. #27
    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

    I think the best way of describing the difference between Valued and Unvalued functions would be "Pleasant" vs. "Unpleasant". The Super-Ego is unpleasant because it is painful, while the Id is unpleasant because it is boring. The Ego is pleasant because it makes you feel strong and competent; the Super-Id is pleasant because it fulfills your inner desires. These things are "valued" and "unvalued" because we like pleasure, and dislike pain/boredom.

    However, unless you're weak and can't endure a little pain and boredom, there is no reason to "hate" or "scorn" your unvalued functions.

    @Pinocchio: The point of the article by Rick was to counter your claim that you can't "work on" your Super-Ego:

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    There is no such thing as "more or less valued" or "work on it". Super-Ego elements are what you're not, your antithesis. Can't you comprehend this, you can't work on it because you have to work against what you are.
    "Working on your Super-Ego" is actually one of the more central elements of the personal growth aspect of socionics. The Super-Ego is a major source of psychological pain, so becoming more competent in those areas will help reduce the amount of pain one feels (for example, by learning more "scripts" for the Role function).

    From personal experience, working retail has strengthened my ability to handle strangers and people I don't know that well, i.e., people I'm not close enough to to be able to determine their Fi opinions of me. I've developed certain "scripts" for dealing with people in a polite and friendly manner, to avoiding making Fi mistakes. I "worked on" my Role Function and consequently reduced the amount of pain I have to endure when interacting with the outside world.

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves View Post
    It's subjective moral offenses. Other people just 'get you' and understand you and other people don't. They just do not agree with your lifestyle or anything that you're doing, cause it's a clash of values. It's not so much 'what you're doing' as 'how you're doing it' but what you're doing is also related to how you're doing it, so it is kinda that.

    Ahem. We see this all the time. Other people will root for you and stick up for you and other people want to see you suffer, Not just suffer though - You just don't exist to them, the true you internal subjective magical you that you just want people to love and you feel you should be liked for being yourself but it doesn't work that way and you can never be everything to everybody, just a few of them.

    The more you're advocating for how somebody is internally the more you are meshing with their true self and the more of an unconditional, healthy relationship it is based on the common sense that nobody is going to change for anybody else. No matter how much they like somebody, they will put some concentrated effort in - but there is the 'you' you can't change, and socionics quite well describes this subjective phenomenon.

    But yeah you're right, interacting with the world requires a lot of sacrifice I think, but I do think this is easier depending on the functions said society values.
    I agree with all of this. Very well put -- profound, even! I like it when somebody puts into words things I had previously felt, but not been able to express.
    Quaero Veritas.

  28. #28
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    I think the best way of describing the difference between Valued and Unvalued functions would be "Pleasant" vs. "Unpleasant". The Super-Ego is unpleasant because it is painful, while the Id is unpleasant because it is boring. The Ego is pleasant because it makes you feel strong and competent; the Super-Id is pleasant because it fulfills your inner desires. These things are "valued" and "unvalued" because we like pleasure, and dislike pain/boredom.

    However, unless you're weak and can't endure a little pain and boredom, there is no reason to "hate" or "scorn" your unvalued functions.

    @Pinocchio: The point of the article by Rick was to counter your claim that you can't "work on" your Super-Ego:



    "Working on your Super-Ego" is actually one of the more central elements of the personal growth aspect of socionics. The Super-Ego is a major source of psychological pain, so becoming more competent in those areas will help reduce the amount of pain one feels (for example, by learning more "scripts" for the Role function).

    From personal experience, working retail has strengthened my ability to handle strangers and people I don't know that well, i.e., people I'm not close enough to to be able to determine their Fi opinions of me. I've developed certain "scripts" for dealing with people in a polite and friendly manner, to avoiding making Fi mistakes. I "worked on" my Role Function and consequently reduced the amount of pain I have to endure when interacting with the outside world.



    I agree with all of this. Very well put -- profound, even! I like it when somebody puts into words things I had previously felt, but not been able to express.
    Wow, we're actually talking about human beings, thank goodness, I thought there would be no progress.

  29. #29
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol Thank you.

    yeah it's really interesting. No matter what you do with some people you'll always be the bad guy. The relationship will cause inevitable friction and destruction. And I'm not really talking about the good kind of destruction that has a light at the end of tunnel but more like this slow suicide mess of just....idk constant death. How low can you go? Start hanging around people who don't value you, and you'll quickly find out!

  30. #30
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  31. #31
    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 Pinocchio View Post
    I told you that those are metaphors, why do you insist in asserting that I was talking about "real", palpable things? Super-Ego IEs are not something real, not something one can identify and say "I hate that" (although many users do this confusion from time to time, me included ).
    Most importantly, some manifestations in nature/society of the subdued elements are not even bothering unless they affect you directly *.

    Take for example tribal habits which fascinate people, even if you're Fi PoLR you can be fascinated and attracted by them, but they are against your Ego values, you'd be bothered when you'll be affected by it (eg. being forced to respect a tradition yourself). If you noted, youngsters use to refuse and hate the traditions of their place, but be willing to adopt the ones of other places (eg Celtic, Viking, whatever) but basically they are the result of the same information aspect (as we were talking about Fi).

    Your problem is that you take IEs lightly as if they were simple real-life things that you can cope with or adapt to. They're not, try to understand this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    * - I'm notifying you again that I told you this already and I hate when someone ignores my arguments just to nullify my declared position and take it over again, maybe you'll understand why you piss me off in the end :|.
    Wait, what? When did you say the IEs are "metaphors"? Maybe I missed it, but I went back and checked and could not find any previous references to Super-Ego IEs, or any IEs, not being "real". Maybe I'm missing something, to what are you referring?

    What started this whole debate off, for me, was your statement here:
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    Maybe I don't understand what you mean, but Super-Ego IEs are something anyone disagrees with, scorns, hates and so on. Neither accomplishments of someone else based on them are valued, they are perceived as crap (the natural accomplishments of your Conflictor is complete crap good to be burned, agree?).
    I don't quite understand how your statement that Super-Ego IEs are "not something one can identify and say 'I hate that'," can be true at the same time as your statement "Super-Ego IEs are something anyone disagrees with, scorns, hates, and so on." What distinction are you trying to make here? I don't understand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    It doesn't. The article deals with real-life things you can adapt to, accept and work on, but that doesn't mean you can truly value them because they negate your Ego. In my knowledge no one does that.

    That's like a how-to which teaches a spy/assassin to "fall in love" with his/her victim, he has to get over his feelings of repulsion, sympathy or whatever, learning to see your victim from a different perspective doesn't mean that you deny yourself and your true principles, it's just a discipline to react differently.
    Once again, I think it's important to note that I am making a distinction between the specific technical socionics term "value", and the more general, ordinary use of the word. When I say that I am able to see the "value" of our Super-Ego functions in the general sense of the word, I don't mean that I somehow don't find them unpleasant, or that I particularly enjoy using them. It simply means that I can see and understand their importance and their usefulness, and why it might be sometimes necessary to use the Super-Ego IEs, even if I don't enjoy doing it.

    To my mind, to hate or scorn something implies that one cannot see any importance or usefulness in it, and that one wants to eliminate them if possible. While I would of course prefer not to have to deal with my Super-Ego IEs, I can still see their usefulness and importance from an impartial point of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinocchio View Post
    Can you please use examples from your real-life? "Fi mistakes" may mean something different for you and I'd like to know because I think you're mistyped... I'm just trying to understand a lot of what I perceive as "confusion" in your concepts.
    Okay, for example, one thing I've had to deal with at my job is small talk. Small, pointless conversations about the weather or whatever, which I find completely uninteresting. However, these small conversations serve an Fi purpose: small talk helps establish friendly relations with people you don't know all that well -- by talking in a friendly manner about the weather, you establish that you have no overtly hostile intentions toward one another. A somewhat trusting, positive Fi relationship is established.

    As a Ti type, I would really prefer not to be concerned with what other people feel about me. I'm terrible at estimating others' opinions about me, especially if I don't know them well, and I constantly feel like I'm making mistakes, doing things that would cause people to not like me.

    A Te topic such as the current state of the sky, I find extremely boring. As a consequence, I find small talk about the weather to be very uninteresting. My initial response to someone saying "It's a cold day outside, eh?" would be "Um, I don't really care what the current state of the weather is." However, I have learned that to actually say that would be an Fi mistake -- by refusing to talk about the weather, I am sending unintentional signals of mild hostility, which will likely affect my Fi relationship with that person negatively.

    Consequently, I have learned how to "play along", give the appropriate polite responses, and maintain positive Fi relations with the customers. I would rather not have to do it, but I can see the importance and usefulness of maintaining positive Fi relationships with the customers, therefore I put aside what I would like to do, and do what I must.
    Quaero Veritas.

  32. #32
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request
    Last edited by Pied Piper; 02-22-2010 at 01:13 PM.

Posting Permissions

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