Well I can get these people mixed up in terms of how they come across ... erm so what are some ways they generally come across physically that differ from each other? Real life examples would be great.
Ni-leadings vs Se PoLRs
Well I can get these people mixed up in terms of how they come across ... erm so what are some ways they generally come across physically that differ from each other? Real life examples would be great.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Awesome!Originally Posted by Dynamicism
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
I believe the big difference here is-DS and
Se as a vulnerable (4th) function (LII and EII)
The individual tends to overreact to aggressive or confrontational behavior, taking it as a personal threat when it may only be a knee-jerk reaction or the result of a bad mood.
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. If these strategies fail, his efforts at dealing with the resulting conflict make him look actively pushy in a way that appears awkward and unnatural to others. This opens him up to painful criticism and feelings of weakness and helplessness.
He is able to moralize and instruct others about what they should do and why, but he is not prepared for others' active resistance or refusal to do as he says. In his mind, this would require him to put aside reason and good feelings and simply make the other person do what is necessary. This is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for him to do.
Se as a suggestive (5th) function (IEI and ILI)
The individual is often characterized by his inertia. If left to his own devices, he may choose to do relatively little to interact with the outside world. When he does interact with the outside world, he often finds his activities to be empty and unfulfilling. To this individual, life is often characterized by periods of stimulation. For him, however, true stimulation is often spontaneous, and interludes between periods of stimulation are often characterized by tedium, inertia, and apathy. He is often not very adept at finding new areas of interest, and may seek to continue to reproduce past experiences instead of moving on to new things. In order to break out of this cycle, he requires an outside stimulus of spontaneity and activity. With such a degree of spontaneity introduced into his life, the tedium and perceived meaninglessness is replaced by a constant state of activity in which he can experience new things and escape from the confines of his own mind.
He is additionally very indecisive. He may lack the ability to make important decisions, especially with regards to his own future. He may know what he wants to achieve out of life in a broad or long term sense, but will find it very difficult to set and finish the short term projects leading to it. In order to be able to act, he needs a tangible and definite stimulus from somebody well grounded in external reality and who has a clear picture of what must be done in a certain situation.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
thanks, Crispy! (c:
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
I believe the big difference here is
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
exquisite description. Two ILEs I know demonstrate this by an angry overreaction to physical encounters (i.e. excessive force).
IEI or EII??
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
I find it hard to see him as the type as Eminem:
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Removed at User Request
The way I see it, all four intuitive introvert types are highly mentally reflective. INxjs are disturbed when they are not allowed to think things through and come to assured decisions. INxps can appreciate people who push them into the rush of instinctual spontaneity. This might work out by INxjs feeling crippled by situations that don't allow for sufficient mental prep while INxps feel inspired by people who they can follow in such situations. INxjs might see Se-types as too fast, instinctual and maybe even somewhat scary while INxps will likely see the same people as strong, confident, and capable.
The manifestation of Se in both types is relatively unnoticeable other than how they respond to people who focus on Se.
When it comes to Ni otoh.. INxjs are subconsciously rooted to how they imagine things to be which makes them consciously focused on things they are not sure of in the context of their base element. This drives their analytical nature. INxps focus on the expansion of their imaginative worlds and play out scenarios in their mind just to see what would happen under different circumstances.
Just my take
Se-PoLRs aren't going to be so keen on living life and accepting things as they are, as this is a direct PoLR-hit on their Si knowledge base (what they already know and have to think through and meld with their ideas). If in the process of attempting to live life in the moment, stimuli will either begin to look repetitive in parallel to their already known Si knowledge base, or by nature, something will quickly derive a need for instant thinking and theorizing about whatever it is, soon to be lost in their thoughts with no care for what's going around them. They avoid confrontation and can be annoyed by any external happenings, even if they've already been prepared for them. They just never had much to care about with these different activities and events. They don't want to take in information, unless it's of current interest or question. Only the necessary amount; their Ne's creative and experimental nature will guide them to eventual success. They would rather internalize everything so it makes sense to just them, and they'll even go out on a limb irrationally to explore their thoughts and not come to any conclusions or sense, but only to keep thinking and explore the potentialities of what makes sense at the time. They might not care if others don't understand their ideas, since most people would see them as unrealistic or idealistic. They typically have a large social shell and comfort zone, and are typically late-bloomers for every-day conduct (the life that is in common with everyone else).
Ni-dominants, by comparison, are more open to letting loose and living life in the moment, since they naturally sort of seek it out. They may have an easier time looking at their inner sources of truth, than to resort to just fully taking something "as-is," however they will eventually get fed up with their same underlying interpretations, begin seeing these things as essentially too distorted and chaotic in the midst of lacking real experience, and by solution just spontaneously start to integrate themselves in the moment and begin having a refreshingly positive attitude toward trivial every-day things. They will except external change and confrontation. Real life experience on the outside will help them gain an advantageous perspective once they go back to investigating "what's really going on," by their comprehension. By contrast an Se-PoLR type might just switch mental tracks and begin focusing on a new area of thought using Ne to change perspectives. In a rare circumstance, a new source of information will arrive right in time to help them progress a thought into a brand new tangent (these unexpected and unwanted sources of information can sometimes be the key to unlocking potential interpretations of knowledge, to build new ideas and theories, something maybe revolutionary and novel.) Ni-dominants' genius, on the other hand, is more identified as how they're able to easily read into a circumstance for how it really is, and not just what it appears to be. Most Ni dominants would say they know reality, and hold true to it. It's the inner truth in what can be seen, and they have skepticism towards differing viewpoints. Most Se-PoLRs will actually know deep down inside that they're not a big fan of reality, and they're not typically here to say that their thoughts represent truth. They're idea-smiths, mental risk-takers. Subconscious Ni and conscious Ne usually lead them to having a weak loyalty of constitution, ever changing perceptions, and entertaining what-if alternate realities within their knowledge base.
Removed at User Request
Last edited by Pied Piper; 07-01-2010 at 11:21 AM.
Cool.. Awesome stuff! Convinced that my mum's Se PoLR now. :-P
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Focused on things they're not sure of.. you mean trying to work those things out? Or not accepting those things?
Not coming to any conclusions... wouldn't that be more specifically EII? Seems to me that an LII would aim to come to conclusions.
What do you mean by a large social shell?They typically have a large social shell and comfort zone, and are typically late-bloomers for every-day conduct (the life that is in common with everyone else).
Isn't this more just EII too?Most Se-PoLRs will actually know deep down inside that they're not a big fan of reality, and they're not typically here to say that their thoughts represent truth. They're idea-smiths, mental risk-takers. Subconscious Ni and conscious Ne usually lead them to having a weak loyalty of constitution, ever changing perceptions, and entertaining what-if alternate realities within their knowledge base.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Removed at User Request
Well this applies to LII as well, however the idea is that LII conclusions are not typically final or taken with much weight, as they tend to think about possibilities and change their minds. A decision or conclusion is merely an intellectual weight for thought and analysis. It is normal though for both LIIs and EIIs to hold to certain truths based on their expertise, but these truths don't have to be all that concrete or recognizable to outside observers.
I wouldn't think that these characteristics are exclusive of LII, but for individuals within both of these types I'm sure there is quite a level of confidence and depth which goes along with serious thought reflecting realistic scenarios. I'm sure any LII can specialize in an interest or field of thought more practical, while still proving their creative and experimental nature, yet still off-set from the contemporary side of things. What you should know about Ne is that it can appear active and engaged in perceiving an outside source, but this outside source is really just a separate interpreted vehicle for activity created and managed by the internal source. What appears to be direct information feeding into the Ne unit is represented in the subconscious, and the actual conscious conception is of mental activity and response, which is why LIIs do have a serious focus about them, but it's not based on something so objectively real as Se. An LIIs reality is more reminiscent of introspection and strong influence-based theorizing.
ok thanks
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Removed at User Request
Ni leading: soft, careless
Se polr: alerted, touchy
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
--> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
Ni leading are concerned about time and how it is running and are able to stay inor time related topics for a long time, where Se PoLRs don't want to stay there. Se PoLR means that for a brief period of time the person can discuss the events that flowed through time or are flowing through, but not for long, just as a momentary thing. For instance, you will catch me saying things like, "O I wish it didn't happen that way" (lementing over a past event) or saying that something will happen later, but not for long, that just happends subconsciously, as in I can't really control when I'm about to say something that ties with time or discussion with time. I don't know if Ni primary are prone to long reflective time, I certainly don't prefer it.
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
This is a good thread. I was thinking of Se polr and tendency to manipulate people (instead of just telling them what to do). I think there could be a connection. I don't necessary mean manipulative in a negative sense.
"Ni leading: soft, careless
Se polr: alerted, touchy "
Semi agree, but not precise or meaningful really.
Ip vs Ij temperament is better and easier to recognize.
Sometimes people want me to be alerted and touchy and I put myself into that state but can't do it outside of the situation and naturally fall into what Te types call "laziness". ILI's and SLI's annoy me because of their "soft" or careless yet Te/perfection state. There is no such thing for and I can never appease these people and they get annoyed when I stop trying to. Many people don't seem to appreciate indiduality/differentitation and intertype relations always win over time. Bitches...
Michael Jackson was ENFj
NF's in interview like setting are really easy to mix up because of how easily they can fall into periods of using or displaying Ni, Fe, Fi and Ne
He does look like and EStj - I give this as supporting evidence that the Beatels could all be Delta, creative and hardworking
Actually, the softness is what attracts me to ILI and SLI types, benefitiary relations can be very warm and supportive, but they put too much train on unvalued functions, for me, that would be Ni
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
This is absolutely true and correct and I can only stand the Se type of impulse and spontaneity for so long before it starts to really bother me but one thing that bothers me more with SeTi and TiSe is their “real” or “realistic” nature. I observed that many years ago watching a Chris Reeve interview where he discussed how repulsed he was when kids would admire him as Superman while screaming for his autograph in the streets of NY. He voiced and shouted at the kids to leave him alone and go do something worth while in the real world. I thought how much of a hypocrite he was, to play a fantasy superhero role and inspire good values through that role, but not care for any, morals or values the character stood for. He always spoke about wanting to get past the image that made him a living and did not like it when he was seen or admired for being a superhero because it was a fantasy.
This man is not someone I would want as my dual. At least, when my duals do something, anything that is good, they know it and are not hypocrites about their role.
I responded to Christopher Reeve's Se in that interview by outright calling him a hypocrite who takes advantage of the industry without any common sense that the suporters of his role and career are kids and people who admire the noble values of these superhero roles, even though they are make belief.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 07-01-2010 at 11:15 PM.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Rambly, but at least you get it
I like how your depiction of Ne confers a higher suggestibility to the object (That the subjective perception is change by objective leads, "outside of the box"), whereas Ni has is focused on an increasingly distilled and neutral perspective ("about the box").
Last edited by ArchonAlarion; 07-02-2010 at 03:30 AM.
The end is nigh
Removed at User Request
Ne is extraverted. Extraverted functions have external reference points (This object means something for this other object). Introverted functions have internal reference points (This is the way the object relates to my accumulated exerience). Extraverted functions adapt their perspective to what is suggested by external conditions, whereas Introverted functions submit the object to personal archetypes (Once submitted and altered in light of these subjective archetypes, the object is now in the subject's native language - it may serve as a tool/example of the archetype).
"Extraverted Intuition uses the "principle of incompleteness of any interpretation" to lead one to follow empirical signs in ways that promise that what is hidden will become apparent. Introverted Intuition uses the same principle to explore alternate interpretations that are not suggested by observation--that might be intrinsically unable to become apparent by any means (except justificationless intuitive leap).
Perhaps that's the common denominator linking all Extraverted and Introverted forms of the same attitude: same understanding of how signs relate to meanings, different heuristics--the extraverted one leading you to navigate through the world one sign at a time, the introverted one leading you to treat signs as stimuli for ideas about how to navigate in general. The extraverted heuristic would lead you to follow the topography of the world without making inferences about it, the introverted heuristic would stimulate you to make inferences about the topography of the world without actually exploring it."
-Intuition
The end is nigh
Removed at User Request
I identify with most of this. I don't fully agree with the last statement, I don't assume there's always a catch but I know very well there often is. I especially identify with the first statement, I must make a connecting, figure it out. However, I fail to see how what you said relates to Se PoLR
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Removed at User Request
You needn't quote yourself, having stated this interpretation of internal/external many times. What I would like to know is *why* you think it's subjective/objective, against clear field/bodies distinction - bodies dealing with pieces of information, fields with how we connect them. As flawed as our perception is, it's these "pieces of information" we get through it that are "objective", except for previously stated limitations - which make any perception subjective in practice - unaffected by our relation to them. Connections we make between them are inherently subjective, that is, dependent on a subject making a connection; what makes you think of what, and how your inner (so as not to use internal) framework of thought works. The latter has no semblance of objectivity, even though it might use logic. Logic doesn't equal objectivity.Good point. But the problem is that Internal and External IEs depend on internal and respectively external reference points. Not because you pronounced these words, but because this is how it is. Sensing and Logic depend on external factors, you are talking exactly about this thing. Ne doesn't depend on external constraints, unlike Se, it's free to consider existing or not existing capabilities of an object. For Ne, the object itself may not even exists or be realistic, it's still one (certain) object it's dealing with.
Extroversion doesn't tell anything about subjectivity, Bodies/Fields it something else, eg Ti and Si are objective, still Introverted.
The Introverted/Extroverted difference is perfectly described by this sentence in your quote:
This is what's of interest to you, next I'll just develop with no intention of going further on it.
Laziness > Paranoia. Sometimes the most readily apparent option really is the best, thus why it's so apparent.
I could see Ne-creative/Se-PoLR behavior as being inclined to find a connection, but I disagree with the example. The average sane person does not need to be suspicious of everything.
Removed at User Request
If something is obvious, then what reason is there to question it?
Removed at User Request
The only reason I'd ever switch to another operating system is if my current one terminally failed for some reason. There is nothing to justify the investment of time in learning to deal with the system all over again. I imagine someone with other dispositions could only have a poor sense of personal efficiency.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
