First-Person POV of the functions

[Azeroffs]

This is how I understand the functions from the perspective of self. Influenced by dimensionality of functions. Feel free to critique.

Base function:

When you ask me about this element, I find it strange that you don't know. Just look around. It's everywhere and in everything. It's impossible to not know, and there is nothing without it. I hardly know of what I speak. Its level of fundamentalism makes describing it like describing color to the blind. If you dismiss it, then I must dismiss you as delusional for it obviously important. When you tell me how awesome I am for focusing on it, I'm a bit confused. I'll take the compliment, but it's meaningless to me because it really is nothing.

Creative:

I've learned how to manipulate this at a young age. I know this better than most people or so I think, and it gives me an edge in the world. It's my specialty. I could live without it, but my life would lose direction, and I'd be pretty incapable. I like to play with this. I find it fun. I like to help others with it as well. If you dismiss it, then I have nothing to say really. I don't really know an alternative. When you tell me how well I accomplish things with it, I'm not surprised, but it does bring a smile.

Role:

This has been confusing to me. I've seen it in others, and for a while I didn't understand. I've grown to adapt to it, but I didn't have much of a choice. I find it uncomfortable and unnecessary, but others seem to want it. As I get older I'm pretty good at it, but occasionally I'm humbled by learning something new. It gets tiring. When others expect it too much, it stresses me out. I long to meet someone who will see through this, and I'm quickly drawn to such people.

PoLR:

I've noticed this every once in a while. I have no idea what to do with it. I've heard others talking about it. Sometimes I pretend to know it, but people usually notice that idk much about it. I can't use my prized creative on it. I'm scared that it might become important one day. Idk what I'll do if it does. I would be lost if it does.

Suggestive:

Idk anything about this, and I never would have know it existed if not for that person I met. That person was really amazing. The things they knew and showed me, changed a lot about me. I wish I could find more people like that.

Hidden Agenda:

I don't give this much thought, but I do realize that I lack it. I know I can be better at it, and I would feel a lot better as a person if I could. I get frustrated with it though. I want so much to be better that sometimes I just pretend to be. I feel like a complete idiot when people realize I'm not good at it.

Ignoring

I never give this any thought. Why would I? What use is it to me or anyone for that matter? People who focus on this are wasting their time. I know quite a bit about this, but the world would probably be better place without it.

Demonstrative

Yeah what about it? It's just so obvious that there's no point in talking about it. I end up having to work with it a lot, but that's just because it's everywhere. I hate when people dwell on this. It's really annoying. Way to state the obvious.

[silverchris9]

Cool! Let me try.

Leading: Well, it's sort of obvious that this is the most interesting thing to talk about, and it is very natural. It's my source of self-entertainment. I could play around with this forever. When I'm engaged in it, I feel natural. When I'm not engaged in this, forced to draw my focus away from it, I feel out-of-sorts. This is the world in which I walk. It "contains" the few things I'm certain of. Without it, I don't think the world would make much sense to me anymore.

Creative: Eh. This is super-useful, and I need it to work properly/achieve my goals. I like using it to make people happy and such. But it's not the most important part. Like, this is sort of profligate and everywhere and used for everything, but it's definitely not an end in itself. It's definitely the first thing people notice about me, it's what comes free with the meal, it's the calling card I give out to people when they first meet me and I'm still feeling them out. I sort of identify it with enneagram instinctual variants: creative is the so, and leading is the sx. Leading is what I want someone to bond with. Creative is like honey for the flies. mwa ha ha.

Role: This is sometimes useful to me in private. But I don't focus on it. I don't make it happen. People sometimes chide me for not paying enough attention to it, and I know they're vaguely right, but not in an interesting or useful way. This sort of concerns things that I want to happen, but not have to focus on, if that makes sense (whereas with polr, I just don't care if things related to it happen or not). It does feel vaguely consciousness-stretching to focus on it in private, by myself. But I can't *use* it for anything the way I can use my first two functions. On the other hand, it's a lot more comfortable and possible to nestle into this way of being and think from thence than to try to think in terms of my polr. That just hurts my head and makes my stomach hurt.

Polr: Honestly, I just avoid this. I don't understand it. I don't care about it. When people try to make me focus on it, my stomach hurts, and I tend to think they're very, very silly for making such a big deal out of it. I mean, really? You know this is totally unimportant and irrelevant, right? Much like the role, when someone points something out to me about this, I know they're technically right, but I still don't care. HA is an important defense against this. It's like the only way I can make information about the polr "wrong." Otherwise it's like correct information that I just can't apply or give any importance to.

Suggestive: . This is like the function that I need in the background of my life. It makes things make sense. I mean, I know I said that about the leading function, but this is what makes other things make sense. I legitimately need a constant source of it for anywhere near maximum productivity. I especially appreciate people who tolerate my weakness in this area because they care about my strengths in other areas. This function always provides the opposite perspective that nonetheless fits with my perspective. I have no idea how it works, and when I try to do it myself, except at a very low level of difficulty, I fail miserably. But I can tell when it's around, and I just like it. Basically, my awareness of this function is entirely limited to its presence or absence. I have no understanding of its inner workings at all. I also notice that I sort of assume this is "how the world is" at a basic level, like this is in the background of my consciousness without being in any way manipulable or usable.

Hidden Agenda: Ah, this is my crouching tiger hidden badass function. This is the function where if nothing else is working, and no one is showing up to help me, I can use it to defeat mine enemies and smite the wicked. But it has a high energy cost, and I can't use it that often, so it would still be more convenient if someone could reach into my mind and say what I would say in HA terms, if that makes sense. If I really trust someone, it's nice when they gently correct me on the mistakes I make in this area. Otherwise, it's painful to be shown up here, normally because I've already tried everything else, and if using the HA doesn't work to accomplish the goal, then I'm going to have to concede some measure of defeat.

Ignoring: Um... yeah. People talk about it. They're not wrong, but they're not interesting either. Whenever people bring this up, it just seems kinda off-topic. Like, "oh yeah, wow, good observation, uh-huh, yeah, have your people call my people we'll talk about that over lunch on tuesday, yeah, sure, okay, have a good one! bye." That's my general reaction to this function. The number one word for this function is irrelevant. It doesn't hurt me to focus on it, it doesn't bug me to focus on it---except insofar as it's a waste of time---but I mean... why would you? There are MUCH more effective and enjoyable ways of accomplishing all of the goals one would accomplish with this function.

Demonstrative: This is like a two-headed thing. On one hand, I can totally over-focus on this, and that just makes my life awful. This function is the number one function that results in me getting out of my base/leading function. On the other hand, it's fun to play with as long as it stays in its place. It can provide seasoning to imagination-land. And it is an important thing to be able to understand, just no fun to focus on. To me, it's a little like spyware/adware/virus protection on a computer: you want to leave it running all the time, you want your computer to do it well, you want the information it provides on hand to use when necessary. You want it to do its job. But at the same time, you don't want to have to deal with it, focus on it. You're not going to stop surfing the internet to say, "ooooh, let me check my virus and spyware protection!" No, you deal with that consciously on a purely as-needed basis, and you leave it running "unconsciously" all the time.



btw, strongly agreed on what you said about ignoring. The world would be a better place without it. I want to tell people, "just don't bother with it, there's a better way to make this happen." Also your descriptions were more general and nonspecific to your personal IMs than mine. Shrug.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

Base (Static): chaotic and slipshod; this is something that gets the job done with no regard to the detailed consequences of the action beyond getting some result envisioned. It is a bull in a china store that does damage to everything other than your own goals. Sustained use raises hell with people, so be cautious.

Creative (Static): this is the point at which you start caring about the situation in an objective way; problem is, the job never quite seems done. Claiming at any point that you've gotten "there" just makes your Base function take over again, though if you spent any effort at all improving your view of the situation the damages can never be quite as bad as those caused by an immediate action.

[Azeroffs]

I would not put it into my words, but I'm exactly the opposite - I'm not trying to make politics to insinuated that you are an ILI - which is still my opinion.

This was more meant to be an description of how one should think of the elements in terms of themselves. Not necessarily how I personally view the elements in myself.

What I was trying to get across as far as base and creative is that the base function is something you're so aware of that you are not even aware of the fact you are aware of it. You take it for granted in other words. The creative function is something that you are aware of and 'use.'

[717495]

Thanks for thinking up this exercise. I'm glad I was able to do it. Most of what I wrote comes straight from my experiences, and I didn't get it from anywhere else. Only now am I noticing a few of the subtle associations with the online descriptions.

-----------------------------------------------------

Dominant
This is what I naturally think about and focus on without any effort. It comes to me naturally and I almost don't like to force myself to use it, because I feel that my instinct on what to think and when to act on it is strong enough, and I will naturally do what is needed. I don't feel bad when people dislike me because of this function; I am too confident about myself when it comes to this (and I might not even notice it.) However, people who show a lack of care in this function make me upset, or people who use it to focus on something insignificant to me, make me upset, like the neighboring quadra who values this, but uses it with my PoLR and demonstrative functions. Everything in life should revolve around this function, and other people need to see what they're missing, or else continue having an unfortunately incomplete understanding.

Creative
I'm very creative with this. I take on an open-minded, up-for-anything approach toward this, and I'm easily enlightened by new ideas from other people. When they're not looking, I'll take this new idea or piece of information they gave me, and test it out in a creation or creative fashion. I like to apply to this function, ideas and information I gather with my dominant function and test them out in real life, but soon enough I'll discard them and find new ones to test out, in a continuous cycle of unsettled creativity. Like on an Etch A Sketch®, no matter how much I like the picture, it has to be erased so I can start again. I'm never able to settle this function, and it doesn't always have to be complete, work, or make sense, because I feel like there's always more time to plan it out and play with the variables it involves. This function can become too overwhelming and dissatisfying when things aren't clicking. Since my dominant function is displeased, a break from the larger ideas constituting this function becomes very necessary, and there is a reminder not to get too involved and take it too seriously.

Role
When I use this function, I can tend to feel awkward because its a sort of fake, alternate way of going about things. I'm happy when this function is eliminated from most set ups. I can be okay at this, but I won't really care to, so people tell me I'm just not good at it, even though I sort of make the excuse that "I really just don't care" and I act like I don't care, so they shouldn't be surprised. But I do have this natural propensity to come back to it and breach the limits on what I thought was possible at the time, and then decide once again that it's just not that important. I'll do what is necessary, if I see something where I just have to.

PoLR
What's the deal with this anyway? Why do people bother me with this function? Yeah I'm bad at it, but at the same time I don't see any reason why others should be good at it. I have no plans to care whatsoever about this function in the realistic future. People should just accept me for who I am, and not obsess about these trivial ideas. If I decide to go for it, then I will, but don't expect it of me. I don't really have standards here, and I'll just go with what other people tell me in that moment, not caring about next time.

Suggestive
I like this function a lot, but it's not really on the top of my mind. It's a personal preference, an ideal, that I'd like to be there in my life, but don't have the time or capacity to fulfill it myself in a professional way. I really like everything about this function and I respect it and people who are good at it. I actually have a natural tendency to lean toward this lifestyle, but it's never as good as "the real thing." I like when someone fixes a problem I have with this function, or shows or tells me how to. I dislike when people deny this function of me, and they don't respect it. When that happens, it can make me feel lost and uncomfortable about my internal state, like there may not be hope for a while. When this element comes back to me, if someone is able to supply it adequately, I feel like life is starting to get better again, and I have that same freedom and confidence I had at the beginning.

Hidden Agenda
This is a big part of my life, but apparently some others are more extreme with it, so it diminishes my sentiments and personal attitude toward it. Compared to the suggestive function, I won't really like someone fixing the problem or telling or showing me what to do, but I won't be completely closed off to advice. To me it's this personal hidden thing, and I don't really care a lot how others chose to go about it, though I have somewhat of a respect for them, and I can sometimes step outside of myself to find their way of life very fulfilling and find myself envious. I feel like there is much to say and do around people of this function, and I can constantly interact with them in a free manner, when I'm in the mood. They will accept me, question and advise me in a positive way. At my very best, I feel like this is the underlying soul and conscience in everything I do. It can tend to haunt me and really question what my ego functions are doing.

Ignoring
This comes naturally to me, but I can really only focus on it when I'm in the mood, which is not incredibly often like my ego functions. It doesn't always come when I need it, nevertheless it stays tuned in the back of my mind, unknowing of its effect on me. I'm more likely to seek use of this function independently, and not ask for help. I can sometimes regret asking for help, because I find the answer all of a sudden obvious once I ask the question out loud. I have a tendency to say things to people, relating to this function, with a lack of knowledge, but acting like I really know what I'm talking about (even though I don't have the care or patience to really think about it). I don't really invest a lot of time or care into this, but I witness this natural ability activate within me, and it works to my advantage in many scenarios, or at least helps me understand something I've recently been curious about. Sometimes the way people use this makes me interested about what I could do, and I may want to prove my ability in this and chose to master a certain element of this. I may have the sudden desire to develop this skill and show people how good I am at it, but I usually start letting myself down because of inconsistency and overestimating initially how much I have to understand. It's too much of a hassle in the long run, since this one thing I want to achieve soon becomes a bunch of things I can't handle. This function is more of a "give-or-take, don't try to force it," and I can never fully master it like I can with my dominant.

Demonstrative
This can tend to be very uninteresting when others bring it up and show me what can be done with it, and give me advice. My feeling on this is usually: "I don't want to go deep into a discussion of it with you. I get the main idea of what you're saying." I sort of naturally see the benefits of this function, but I don't put a lot of energy into doing anything about it. It's really not my top priority, and I can easily neglect this and then find myself wondering why I'm having a difficult time in life. I can then come back to this, as a sort of "reset and get back on track" method, but not consistently proving myself here. I consider people who are good at this function as fairly intelligent, good at what they do, and someone I could ask questions about blanks in my understanding. I need to work more on balancing this function with my every day life, and give it its due attention, but it's mainly just something I don't care much about. I lack the consistency in this area to really master it.

[Suz]

wow, polikujm, i really like your version!!! The others weren't bad either.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

People are creative in their Base function. The Creative function is its limitation, regulation, restriction to a certain spectrum - also a tool and a resource.

This mainly goes for Static types, so I'm not surprised you believe that. Static Base functions are Empowering, so they are a source of new options and the means of rumination.

Creative function is the means of eliminating non-sequitur options and homing in on a single correct answer by consolidating information from different sources.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

A consensus-based argument? "Socionics is what we all say it is because we agree"? Looks like you've finally come to terms with your nature.

It all goes to a lesser extent for Dynamic types. It isn't completely wrong to say their Base functions engage in rumination, but it all happens in a much more implicit way.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

No, a definition-based one.

A definition handed to you by whom? God? Or maybe just by a bunch of people who institutionalized a consensus after all?

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

That's an argument based on authority. You're not making any improvement.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

Can I quote you on the fact that you base your decisions in socionics on authority in the future? Don't answer that. I'm going to anyway.

Improvement is not the same thing with entire rejection of the Model. If you reject the definitions of the Model A, you wholly reject Socionics, so you're talking about something else.

As long as I don't reject the set of practical claims that there exist 16 types that manifest certain intermediate relationships to which a compatibility level can be assigned, there is a basis for communication and all that further matters is whether my claims lend a basis to the prediction of future observations. Also I do not reject any of the terms you mentioned; I just make an addition to them. Static/Dynamic is part of model A and so is Base/Creative, so to use a term to name a combination of these traits is fair game.

[717495]

Ridiculous. To be honest, you should be banned - gross and intentional equivocation. Compared to Maritsa, you know what you're talking about.
---

People are creative in their Base function. The Creative function is its limitation, regulation, restriction to a certain spectrum - also a tool and a resource.

The creative function is the dominant's limitation, regulation, and restriction? And people aren't more creative with their creative function? Sounds like you have a couple of things backwards.

[anndelise]

Dominant
It seems that everything I do leads back to this. It's my prime way of understanding the world. It crosses all situations and all boundaries. I used to think that everyone worked towards this same way of understanding, that it was like a prime motivator for humans in general, but have come to learn that this isn't so. When I hear of people not aiming towards developing this understanding further, or worse, are dismissive of it, I'm aghast at the idea. How could they NOT be? It's too important in life!!

Creative
This is my primary means of developing my Dominant understanding of the world. I ask questions, lots of them, looking for answers that will continue to expand my Dominant understanding. Many times those questions are flat out personal. But I have to ask, I'm compelled to ask. And in my efforts to help others develop their own understanding of the world, I'm willing to share my own experiences, my own situations. And then I'll listen to their responses. What did they get out of my experience that I might have missed? Did they interpret it the same way?

Role
This is one of those parts of life that, while necessary, is uninteresting to me. I know that I need to do these things. And sometimes I'll force myself to stop developing my understanding of the world and of other people's understandings of the world, and get down to the nitty gritty of basic needs. But it's just sooo boring to me, that I inadvertently revert back to my normal way of being, usually without having finished what I had started. I'll willingly avoid situations that try to force me to focus on such things.

PoLR
I hate dealing with this. It's not my job. When other people insist that I include this, or work on this, I get all sorts of agitated and pissy. I want to rail and scream at the person who's trying to force me to do this. It's not my job!! I feel so helpless and hopeless when dealing with it. I know I lack the skills, as well as the focusing ability for it. I've tried to study things that would help me produce this better. Studying how-to books and little games. I can get by in this, if I have to. But really, it's not my fucking job!! If you want it done so badly, do it yourself. No one person can do EVERYthing, so to demand that I do this AS WELL??? Bullshit!

Suggestive
I know I lack skill and ability in this. I ask for help in this, yet I feel childish when I do. It's something that's so useful, and important, that just....is beyond my reach. There's an artfulness about it that escapes me. When I see someone dealing with this, I'm fascinated. I'll stop what I'm doing just to watch or listen. Of course, no matter how many times they explain it to me, or guide me through it, I'll inadvertently forget. But oh, watching/listening to this is one of those 'stop and smell the roses' moments, where my mind is at rest and I can finally relax. If another person provides this for me, I get the grounding I need. It releases my energies that were trapped, allowing me to soar with renewed energy as I continue my pursuit in understanding the world.

Hidden Agenda
Sometimes when I talk, I'm surprised at what comes out of my mouth, as well as how it sounds. It sounds much surer than I actually feel. Mostly I'm quoting what I remember of something that I had read elsewhere. Because of this, I don't feel that I'm very creative. Why do I even do this? I'm not sure, but I think it's a way of communicating my understanding of the world. My language is limited, though, so I'm having to resort to the terminology I've learned elsewhere. It's not always coherent. It's more along the lines of I'm trying to point at the moon...but alas, people keep getting caught up in looking at my finger. So I'll try different ways, different terms, arranging and rearranging it, hoping that someone will finally catch on to what I'm referring to.

Ignoring
Ugh, this is one of those things that..ugh. I mean, when I'm trying to describe my understandings, certain bits of information is implied in it, even though not flat out stated. I'm focusing on the one thing but some people seem to expect me to ignore that, and focus on this other thing. They serve two completely different purposes. But no, I'm expected to ignore my main interest and focus on what this other person wants me to focus on? They say that what I'm focusing on isn't relevant. Relevant to WHOM?? It's definitely relevant to what I'm trying to do, even if it's not relevant to what THEY want or what THEY are trying to do. (Unfortunately, I think I might inadvertently do similar to them. )

Demonstrative
I do this. I know I do this. I feel like I have no control over doing this. I'll often get accused of doing this for such and such purposes. No. There was no thought given prior to doing this. I just did it, period. We can look at why I might have done it, AFTER I did it. But to say that I had a certain intent prior to doing this? No. It's like, something musta happened that triggered this response. But it's an automatic response, not something planned. If something or someone keeps triggering these responses, I feel as if I'm losing control of myself. Like I'm a fucking puppet on a string. STOP IT!!! I'll try to avoid whatever's triggering it negatively. And if I can't fully avoid it, then at the least, I'll do my best to suppress future automatic responses. No need to let the other person know how much control they might have over me. But when I do this, when I suppress my automatic responses, I feel as if I'm trying to suppress a major part of myself. This places me at risk of depressive episodes. So I'll often feel torn between knowing that I'm not intentionally responding with this, and trying to suppress it when I feel it's unsafe to do respond with this. However, when I feel that I'm in a safe environment, with people who accept me good AND bad, then I feel more free to just let these responses occur naturally, as they pop up.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

You have my agreement, anyway. This way you confirm once more that I was right in typing you as Se-Creative: based on an isolated case you conclude that represents me. Well done.

It was a form of jumping to conclusions, supposedly something typical of intuition and antithetical to sensorics. Also the judgment is not conclusive like you imply. If the occasion just provides an indication that I can use as an argument, that's good enough for me. In other words, I do not "conclude" anything. In that regard you misrepresent my stance.

[717495]

Ridiculous. To be honest, you should be banned - gross and intentional equivocation. Compared to Maritsa, you know what you're talking about.
---

People are creative in their Base function. The Creative function is its limitation, regulation, restriction to a certain spectrum - also a tool and a resource.

The creative function is the dominant's limitation, regulation, and restriction? And people aren't more creative with their creative function? Sounds like you have a couple of things backwards.

Wikisocion - Creative Function
Also, when other people express problems having to do with this information aspect, the person quickly takes interest and tries to present solutions — but always through his own base function. For instance, an SEE will try to help other people solve their Fi related problems (relationships and understanding between people) through a Se perspective (making sure you know what you want and are trying to achieve it; understanding the territorial aspect of interaction; recognizing the obvious "dumb things" that people are doing that are ruining the relationship).

The dominant function is the creative function's limitation, regulation, and restriction. The dominant function has much less of a limitation than the creative does, since the creative function is essentially a slave used to aid the dominant. I don't remember in the history of anything something being called dominant even though it's being limited by something less superior. Might want to do some more research.

Now if you're talking about the PoLR limiting the human conception, that doesn't deal with the creative function limiting any function.

wow, polikujm, i really like your version!!! The others weren't bad either.

Thank you. There are still some important things I can think of now that I wanted to add, but it's too late. Better to keep it simple.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Park]

I don't like POV porn.

[anndelise]

I don't like POV porn.

you didn't like what I suggested in my suggestive function description?
but..but..the listening part was said with you in my mind. *pouts*

[krieger]

The Base function is the one a types is prolific in, the Creative creates a restriction to that type of information, that's the prime matter that types use.

I'd like to repeat that I absolutely love you how you basically parrot my views on Limiting/Empowering in Static types in this passage.

Base Static = Empowering (prolific)
Creative Static = Limiting (restriction)

[717495]

I think your take on the word creativity in this context has more to do essentially with both involvement with one's dominant function more than the creative, so to say one uses his dominant more, which is true, and also that these "hypotheses" that are created have a lot to do with one's creative function in the first place, once you get around the idea that a type uses a lot of both ego functions. I don't think that the dominant function, Ne, is the most responsible for doing the actual hypothesizing when Ti is what is responsible for the field of thought in first place. Look at Aushra's hypotheses: a creation thats premise is based on Ti. The dominant function is what colors the creative. Like I said, Ne is what limits what the Ti focuses on. Not sure what point you're trying to make by reading in between the lines.

[krieger]

You'll much more often see an ILE creating hypotheses and questions (Ne) than an LII. You'll much more often see an LII creating explanations and answers (Ti) than an ILE.

I'd say Ne (like any P function) is mostly about the interest in entities and the recognition of these in a snap-shot way. Ti (like any J function) is about distinctions (which facts are a subvariety of), so questions and answers are both related more to this function than to Ne.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

Here's what Aushra said:

Quote:
"This is no science. What I wrote is a lot of hypotheses, it is still necessary to prove and prove, I - said - not at all pleased that this did science and then another began their names to assign to this science."

IMO she is describing the general Ti > Te approach. If you think IxTj types have a perspective that's any different from this, you will find yourself mistaken.

[norph]

IMO she is describing the general Ti > Te approach. If you think IxTj types have a perspective that's any different from this, you will find yourself mistaken.

I could see a bit why this would apply to a Ti+Ne approach, but much less easily why the constant hypothesizing would be a feature of LSIs. How, in your view, is the development of hypotheses not necessarily to be taken seriously something that can apply to LSIs, and how would you differentiate the way that LSIs approach such hypothesizing from alpha thinking?

[krieger]

I would have said INTj if Pinocchio hadn't gotten into his dense head that it isn't obvious I am that type. As for ISTjs, they don't seem any less ideosyncratic and unjustified speakers than any of us.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

Nice attempt, but nothing in the LII descriptions mentions anything about proving hypotheses. Yes, INTj like to establish firm principles that lend a common basis for a lot of beliefs, but they cut corners where proving these principles' empirical applicability is concerned.

[norph]

As for ISTjs, they don't seem any less ideosyncratic and unjustified speakers than any of us.

What observations are you basing that idea on?

And because of these observation of yours that LSIs sometimes disseminate theoretical content with little to do with science (inexact -- but we both know what we're talking about), why do you think that LSIs also have the views that this content is just as hypothetical?

One way to conceptualize the difference is the idea that LSIs theoretical output is precisely seen as less hypothetical and more stubbornly adhered to. Another way is that LSIs' output is not theoretical at all but rather social in nature (the "rule enforcer" of the socion).


In your mind, which of these is it? Is it all of them? Do LSIs really do produce the same kind of hypothetical output as LIIs, and if so how does their approach differ from LIIs? If they don't, how do they justify the lack of empiricism if not by the idea that their ideas are merely unscientific speculation not to be taken seriously?

[krieger]

Aren't these debates supposed to be what the gladiator forum is for?

Jxrtes has committed to the statement that as long as there is any valuable discussion in the posts, there will be no moderator action.

[norph]

Aren't these debates supposed to be what the gladiator forum is for? I'm annoyed that I had to scroll past all of that to get to the replies I actually opened the thread for.

I am truly sorry that you had to scroll for such an unreasonably long time. There was this one time that a guy linked me to some thread on a political forum where tomorrow's winning lottery numbers had been posted but in order to find it I had to scroll through these like 200 massive posts of people arguing about gay marriage and the bible and by the time when I IM'd the guy back complaining that I couldn't find the lottery numbers and he told me that there was no such thing as tomorrow's lottery numbers, I had already suffered irreparable damage to my middle finger for scrolling the mouse wheel over and over in a repetitive motion that put too much stress on my knuckles and I had to have my finger amputated, so I know the dangers of having to scroll through lots of bullshit that you don't care about and I think it's really appalling that anyone on this forum should have to deal with that and that the moderation should really be ashamed of themselves for allowing that to happen on their forum.

[717495]

You, pinocchio, might have some things right, but you haven't really commented on those things. What you have commented on seems very opposite to the truth: the creative which "limits." The PoLR is already limited, the creative function is what makes up for these limits by being open and unsettled. You have one thing right: LIIs are better with systematization, definition, explanation, etc, but it is much more natural for the ILE type to play with these elements in a creative manner. The LII takes Ti in a much more serious, gradually perfecting light, chooses to master it, and help fix the understanding of people who have it wrong. They aren't wavering in their focus here, they're dependent on it. The ILE chooses to create using Ti and stay open, enthused about this function, and doesn't want to depend on the same information. They're not so willing to settle on and prove the same rules over and over again, they instead see new potential with their Ne in systemizations, definitions, etc. and will constantly change their perspectives on things here. This is one of the most basic truths. Look into Aushra's personality and what influenced her system to revolve around the idea that she is an ILE with creative Ti, instead of being an LII with dominant Ti. Her method was to create something with Ti to support Ne, not visa versa. Perhaps if you regard yourself as much less compromiseable with Ti, then it goes to show how uncreative you are here, in Socionics terms, and that you must consider yourself too confident in these matters. Essentially Ti dominant. I could be wrong about you though, as you already seem confused and backwards about this, you could be reversing your own self-perception too. Who knows? (I mean this literally) I'll have to keep a closer eye on you.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request