Tell me Why

[golden]

I am not IEI.

Tell me why I should type myself Delta, either IEE or EII (ENFp, INFj).


Here is what I know, and it is probably useless.

* I use a lot in my relationships. But I also know how to use .

* I use both and .

* I like and get annoyed by too much .

* I think like on a personal level, and I can use in certain contexts, mainly related to my own work.

Here are some other things I know:

* My best friend, her partner, and my most important career mentor are probably IEIs. I think one of my close college friends, upon reflection, is SLE. I'm sure that I could dig up a lot of Betas from my past and present relationship worlds, but those are pretty important ones that seem clear in terms of typing.

* I'm artsy-fartsy and pseudo-intellectual, and self-obsessed, but you could chalk that up to being E4.

* Another BUT: I married a very obvious LSE, Delta as fuck, whose whole family is a parade of Delta. Just because the marriage disintegrated doesn't mean I'm IEI.

* If I am IEI, I probably have made a lot of adjustments to seem acceptable to Delta.

I'd appreciate comments, questions, anything. So what else do you need to know know? I don't need to lay this question (me, Beta vs. Delta) to rest in any ultimate sense, but I think it's healthy to question my type. Indulge me.

[Words]

What annoys you about ?

[golden]

What annoys you about ?

Let's say first that I'm so Socionically naive that it's possible I misconceptualize --that's a possibility.

But as I understand and notice ...

I find too much of it suffocating for some reason. Like it's just so amazingly boring and uncool, unstimulating, unsatisfying. It puzzles me. If I'm around someone who has a lot of need for , I find myself getting drained and impatient. seems to take a lot of time, planning, lingering, savoring, cherishing little detailed sensations or something, depending on the person I'm dealing with and how they process .

To me, is something very basic and I want only a minimum of it. It isn't something I want to cultivate at all.


But feel free to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

[golden]

Huh?

[Words]

Let's say first that I'm so Socionically naive that it's possible I misconceptualize --that's a possibility.

But as I understand and notice ...

I find too much of it suffocating for some reason. Like it's just so amazingly boring and uncool, unstimulating, unsatisfying. It puzzles me. If I'm around someone who has a lot of need for , I find myself getting drained and impatient. seems to take a lot of time, planning, lingering, savoring, cherishing little detailed sensations or something, depending on the person I'm dealing with and how they process .

To me, is something very basic and I want only a minimum of it. It isn't something I want to cultivate at all.


But feel free to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

Ah no, I can't tell you you don't know what you're talking about, maybe someone else will. I was asking for personal reasons, as i'm sure you're IEI. Sorry.

[Simon Ssmall]

Its hard to answer to questions like that because it is unclear what means to you. Saying annoys me but I need lots of means nothing if you are not sure what hides behind those symbols as they seem to mean different things to different people. To some = comfort to some its internal harmony with ones surronding to some its something else that comes from Jungs books or whatever. It would make it easier if you could provide examples, even if most real life examples can always be written off as not type related they still would make it easier to understand where your frustrations comes from.

[golden]

Ah no, I can't tell you you don't know what you're talking about, maybe someone else will. I was asking for personal reasons, as i'm sure you're IEI. Sorry.

Why are you sure I'm IEI?

And would you prefer me to explain my aversion in different terms?

[Aiss]

What Ssmall said. If you were mistyped, most likely your understanding of elements would be the reason. Therefore, using them as placeholders doesn't make sense. "I don't like " literally means "I don't like what I think is" - and we go back to the starting point, because it's meaningless as long as we don't know what you think is.

[golden]

Its hard to answer to questions like that because it is unclear what means to you. Saying annoys me but I need lots of means nothing if you are not sure what hides behind those symbols as they seem to mean different things to different people. To some = comfort to some its internal harmony with ones surronding to some its something else that comes from Jungs books or whatever. It would make it easier if you could provide examples, even if most real life examples can always be written off as not type related they still would make it easier to understand where your frustrations comes from.

Okay, I think you're correct but I was being lazy. And I also am afraid of getting my ass kicked for possibly misconstruing the information elements. But here are some more specific examples. And yeah, this is just how I personally view the elements. I'll start with and .

--my face is very mobile, plastic, expressive. I'm dramatic, I grew up doing performing arts mainly. I know how to affect people and stand out in a crowd, although this can be done subtly. I carefully gauge my effect on others. I use all this to get my way and also to entertain people and just have fun. My emotions bubble forth easily, and I can't really contain them too well.

I can't say much against . I use it, I like it, my relationship to it has often been uncomplicated and joyous. But when I'm in company that doesn't like Fe, I get really uncomfortable, and I've been in that situation a hell of a lot. I had to learn how to turn off my Fe. I like being around dramatic people.

--I can be humanitarian sometimes. I will reach out to people who are lost and hurting, maybe especially when the person is being ignored by others, by society in general. I sometimes have strong reactions along the lines of sympathy/antipathy. And I was raised in the U.S. South, a subculture that values interpersonal propriety.

I could say some things against here, too. I seemed to stand out in the South as not being proper and contained enough. When I find myself getting into value judgments, moral right versus wrong, I am displeased and quickly neutralize those impulses, because it makes me unhappy. I get confused being around people who are emotionally contained and who have a strict sense of right and wrong.

[Aiss]

I could say some things against here, too. I seemed to stand out in the South as not being proper and contained enough. When I find myself getting into value judgments, moral right versus wrong, I am displeased and quickly neutralize those impulses, because it makes me unhappy.

Why does it make you unhappy?

[golden]

Why does it make you unhappy?

I guess it boils down to me feeling like I can't be myself, can't connect with the person who is using, showing, expecting .

In some contexts I feel inferior and selfish around people I see as very -oriented, because I think they are often doing good things but I don't feel motivated to be so "good," myself.

I also just struggle with reading people who have the thing happening. Do they like me? Do they hate me?

And maybe I associate with religion, something I have had a lot of problems with and feel alienated by, and whose adherents are bound to disapprove of me.

In a nutshell, I can do Fi, but I would say I embody Fi in a half-assed manner. And people who are extremely good with Fi make me feel guilty. :\

[Aiss]

When I find myself getting into value judgments, moral right versus wrong, I am displeased and quickly neutralize those impulses, because it makes me unhappy.

Why does it make you unhappy?

Try not to refer to . Explain it on a deeper level than "there's this religion I don't like". Are the norms unclear to you, hard to put into words, so you don't know what's expected of you? Are they, on the contrary, taken too literally and adhered to strictly, beyond the point of reason? Or is the problem simply that you disagree with them? And don't just point out and say "this", try to be more verbose, please. (You asked for it, after all.)

Also, religion in itself isn't . For example, Catholic church is Beta as far as I can tell, while protestant variations seem possibly more -valuing.

[krieger]

What Ssmall said. If you were mistyped, most likely your understanding of elements would be the reason. Therefore, using them as placeholders doesn't make sense. "I don't like " literally means "I don't like what I think is" - and we go back to the starting point, because it's meaningless as long as we don't know what you think is.

I disagree. The function symbols are solid orientation points. They are not semantically void and a lot of the information inherent to their definition is not dependent on elaborate constructs of understanding for being understood.

[Simon Ssmall]

Well yeh, I can understand your reluctance to post how you view elements as people do get criticized a lot for it here. On the other hand as long as you are open to a posibility you might be wrong I doubt youll get that kind of treatment.

Now the :Fe, EIE I know actually are very good at controlling their emotions. They are dramatic people, yes, but to me it seems that dramatism is purposefull, its not uncontrolled. So my questions would be "My emotions bubble forth easily, and I can't really contain them too well." - does this mean you cant controll them or you just dont want to control them and want to appreciate them in its pure form, be it rage, anger, sadness, lust or happyness.

As for and religion then I personally believe it has nothing to do with eachother whatsoever. I have problem with overly religious people myself, they make me cringe. Im mistrustfull of them on a very high degree. If they are just religious and not in my face I have no problems with them.

Neither probably being humanitarian direcly translates into Fi either. In my opinion all NF's are humanitarian and interested in people, even if it is such a clishee coming from MBTI in this case I think it does apply (though it is still my personal opinion others might not share). So being humanitarian and being Fe valuing works just aswell.

How exactly are you improper btw? To some I am a very proper, modest etc. person, to some others im not. I just wonder what kind of artificial social boundaries you cross and in what manner.

All in all although I do think you are IEI, so far nothing here hinted me into it except maybe the fact that you are mistrusting of people liking you if they dont show it (as in are :Fi). And also about you not being able to be just as "good" as some others, I heard this from IEI's and betas before.

However from what you wrote, if I didnt read any of your previous posts id think you are some type weak in Fi and one who is Fe seeking (But it would depend on how you would answer my first question). Yet, I still dont see a problem seeing you as IEI, no matter how our memories work in the same manner .

[Simon Ssmall]

I disagree. The function symbols are solid orientation points. They are not semantically void and a lot of the information inherent to their definition is not dependent on elaborate constructs of understanding for being understood.

So if someone says being tidy = Si and bunch of other stereotypes, and he dislikes overt tidyness and thus thinks he is devaluing Si would write something like "I hate Si, I think its useless and people who use it annoy me" that would be fine by you as you would think he still talks about Si in the end? Dont really get it.

[golden]

Why does it make you unhappy?

Try not to refer to . Explain it on a deeper level than "there's this religion I don't like". Are the norms unclear to you, hard to put into words, so you don't know what's expected of you? Are they, on the contrary, taken too literally and adhered to strictly, beyond the point of reason? Or is the problem simply that you disagree with them? And don't just point out and say "this", try to be more verbose, please. (You asked for it, after all.)

Also, religion in itself isn't . For example, Catholic church is Beta as far as I can tell, while protestant variations seem possibly more -valuing.

Okay, Aiss. I'll try. I appreciate you insisting on clarity, btw.

Let's go to a specific social world I've spent a lot of time in. The school my son attends uses an alternative form of education that arises from an idealistic and spiritual philosophy. Many of the families drawn to this education are really "nice" and traditional. The education cultivates children's morality. The teachers and the mothers tend to embody this quality of "right" versus "wrong."

Now, I think it's good for my kid to be part of that world because I myself do not impart a strong sense of right and wrong. Not to that extent, anyway. To me, it's all relative, but I think that for a child to learn right/wrong, to develop an internal sense of it, is valuable, although I hope that my son will, as he matures, think for himself in these matters.

Two specific other moms come to mind. One of them is from a very humanitarian family that has wealth and created a foundation to fund various worthy causes. She's lovely, kind, contained, soft, an excellent parent, and has a quiet but obvious community spirit. She clearly embodies right and wrong. No one could ever imagine her doing a real moral misdeed. I like her sincerely but feel very apart from someone like her. I feel inferior, I feel gauche, I feel ridiculous. In this little world we have shared, she stands for something selfless and good, and I seem to be just plain out of it.

But I also could critique this woman, and mothers like her, because they have a narrow sense of right and wrong and it pisses me way off. For example, there is another mom in our kids' class who is from a very impoverished background and struggles with basic things like not using drugs, having an income, having a place to live, not being abused by her ne'er-do-well husband. To top it off, the woman is not exactly likeable, and her child is a terror. So when the woman was faced with eviction from her apartment after her husband abandoned her (again) last year in favor of a drug bender, who stepped in to help the woman? That's right, me.

And it's not that I relish doing a good deed, nor that I enjoy the woman's company, as she's a major pain in the ass. But the principle of the thing is that she has had a really rotten life and never gotten a fighting chance. And I'll be damned if I'll just sit by while people like the uber-nice right-and-wrong moms cozily ignore someone's real suffering. And it pisses me off that some of those moms seem to think that by merely in assisting (or even saying hello to) someone who is dirty, impoverished, uneducated, and low-class they will somehow be tarnished by direct association.

They seem to care in theory, but not in practice. To them, the woman is so wrong, and her child is such a bad influence on their kids, that she doesn't belong in our little insulated reality. To me, it's public education (a charter school) and she has a freaking right to be there, and it may be her children's one chance to escape the hell their social class threatens to condemn them to.

So my point is, dealing with this woman is incredibly uncomfortable. She's a mess, she's gross, she's exasperating. But I don't fucking care. Two parents at the school have tried to have her son expelled in the last 1.5 years, and I fought them both times.

It's hard to abstract this complicated situation into versus , but to me it does have a lot to do with those two elements. The parents quietly campaign to oust the "bad" family, or they sit on the sidelines and wait until the "bad" family ousts itself. They have no qualms about verbally condemning the mother and the little boy. A little boy! Innocent, even if a major pain in the ass.

The other two moms I enlisted to help me help the problematic mother are very emotionally expressive. All three of us, in contrast to the judgy, quiet moms, have no problems making outgoing, emotional appeals to various community members. We never put it on a footing of right or wrong. Just in-your-face stuff like, "We are doing X, Y, and Z for this family and want your help." *smile* "What can you do to help them this Christmas?" Or going to the administration: "This family" *blah-blah-blah insert emotional appeal here* "needs certain services, and you can use your pull in the community to procure those services for them by doing X, Y, and Z."

There are two versions of right and wrong at play here. The judgy, quiet, insular parents feel the bad family doesn't belong in our nice community. The oddball, fiery, emotional parents step in to dramatize the woman's situation and stand for something larger. The judgmental parents want these people gone because in the day-to-day they experience them as wrong and bad. The nonjudgmental parents recognize the social clash but stand up for the principle of equal access to a decent education.

And by the way, another of the judgy moms unfriended me on facebook when she found out my ex and I were divorcing. So did my judgy bitch of a sister-in-law.

Maybe this has nothing to do with Fe versus Fi. But pondering Fe versus Fi led me into this narrative. This kind of dramatic social situation exemplifies WHY I often have felt out of place in that cloistered environment. I'm not quietly kind but assessing people on a moral dimension. Rather, I'm emotionally expressive and able to manipulate people into doing what I think is the "right" thing, which is to just let the woman and her little boy be. Just let them have a fucking chance. Therefore, I also have risked not fitting into this social milieu, and so be it.

[golden]

Well yeh, I can understand your reluctance to post how you view elements as people do get criticized a lot for it here. On the other hand as long as you are open to a posibility you might be wrong I doubt youll get that kind of treatment.

Okay, I officially proclaim that I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and am open to correction.

Now the :Fe, EIE I know actually are very good at controlling their emotions. They are dramatic people, yes, but to me it seems that dramatism is purposefull, its not uncontrolled. So my questions would be "My emotions bubble forth easily, and I can't really contain them too well." - does this mean you cant controll them or you just dont want to control them and want to appreciate them in its pure form, be it rage, anger, sadness, lust or happyness.

I know how to deploy my emotions. Let's say that there's a psychic space between me and another human being. With what do I fill that space? Among other things, most prominently, I fill it with emotional expression. Whatever I say or do, I package it in what might be seen as emotional persuasion.

As for controlling/containing, it's just that I am emotionally expressive. Let's say that emotion dwells very close to my surface, and it belongs there. If I have to push it farther down, so it is hidden, I become uneasy and don't feel like myself. And yet, as I've gotten older, I've increasingly inhabited social environments where I must match the subdued tone around me, believing I need to push the emotions down to a more hidden place, and it's very difficult, painful, self-denying to do this.

I mean, I can do it--no problem there, it's acting! But to do it day after day, year after year? Then it's something more serious.

Therefore I say I can't control my emotions well, because especially if I am squelching them, they pop up here and there despite my efforts to deny them. And anyone here will likely say that I should NOT do this in the first place, and no doubt they are correct.

As for and religion then I personally believe it has nothing to do with eachother whatsoever. I have problem with overly religious people myself, they make me cringe. Im mistrustfull of them on a very high degree. If they are just religious and not in my face I have no problems with them.

Neither probably being humanitarian direcly translates into Fi either. In my opinion all NF's are humanitarian and interested in people, even if it is such a clishee coming from MBTI in this case I think it does apply (though it is still my personal opinion others might not share). So being humanitarian and being Fe valuing works just aswell.

Okay, and maybe my long story above illustrates that Fe and humanitarianism are not mutually exclusive at all.

How exactly are you improper btw? To some I am a very proper, modest etc. person, to some others im not. I just wonder what kind of artificial social boundaries you cross and in what manner.

I just feel I have a hard time blending in. No matter how quiet I am (sometimes I'm quiet, sometimes not at all), I feel that I stand out. And sometimes I just feel that I come across as really dramatic and therefore immature. Let's keep in mind that I married an LSE and spent 12 years trying to fit in his reality. Whether or not I have gotten even close to illustrating them, locating them, I do know that Fe and Fi look a lot different. To him, to his family, I would say overall my Fe just looked sort of silly, not sober, not quite correct.

All in all although I do think you are IEI, so far nothing here hinted me into it except maybe the fact that you are mistrusting of people liking you if they dont show it (as in are :Fi). And also about you not being able to be just as "good" as some others, I heard this from IEI's and betas before.

However from what you wrote, if I didnt read any of your previous posts id think you are some type weak in Fi and one who is Fe seeking (But it would depend on how you would answer my first question). Yet, I still dont see a problem seeing you as IEI, no matter how our memories work in the same manner .

Okay.

[golden]

So if someone says being tidy = Si and bunch of other stereotypes, and he dislikes overt tidyness and thus thinks he is devaluing Si would write something like "I hate Si, I think its useless and people who use it annoy me" that would be fine by you as you would think he still talks about Si in the end? Dont really get it.

Examples thereof, from my experience, possibly wrong.

* Cuddling and nursing a baby, hour after hour each day. Difficult for anyone, I guess, grueling for me.

* My mom's house, comfort over appearance. She has a particular chair that is her favorite, dented from regular use to perfectly suit her body. It grosses me out. The pets, hairy, four of them. They exist to make us feel good, soft, cozy, warm. (My own dog's main role was to entertain me and keep things feeling animated, not the same thing.)

* My former in-laws' relationship to food. Borderline obsessive, by my standards. Huge amounts of attention paid to, just for starters, tea. Hot tea. Ordered from Company X. Brewed very carefully, while it is still fresh. (Can't be a few weeks old.) Let's make the tea, the very special tea, savor it, sit around and have quiet discussions with the tea binding us all together. We thought about the tea for two hours before drinking it. We have it at the proper time. It helps our digestion! Ah, I feel good now, how nice. We could spend an hour this way. Delightful. Perhaps we should start thinking about dinner, now that we have prepared ourselves with this outstanding tea. Or perhaps we could further assist digestion and well-being by going for a constitutional walk. NOT a quick walk. We will walk slowly, we will saunter. Why is Golden marching up ahead? Why doesn't she slow down? Why is she skipping? Why is she prancing? Why is she throwing her son over her head? My goodness, all of that looks uncomfortable.

These kinds of things are Si to me, and if I must go along with them too much they exhaust me and make me feel like I'm doing absolutely nothing with my hours, my days, my life. I feel limp and buried and smooshed by it.

[Simon Ssmall]

In all fariness to tea, if you want all those good things that come from it it does have to be fresh

[golden]

In all fariness to tea, if you want all those good things that come from it it does have to be fresh

I take pride in properly brewing a fine cup of tea or coffee. I can make these drinks correctly, I drink them and think they're good, and it's over quickly with little reflection. No big deal, on to something that actually interests me. See? It's not an end in itself. It's well-prepared fuel, and that's all.

If I don't have good coffee or tea on hand, though, I'll drink something crappy. Whatever.

[Simon Ssmall]

Hurr burr tea aint no oil!

But ill stop derailing this thread, I understood you the first time you wrote it.

[Aiss]

Okay, I seriously fail to see how any of this is socionics related.

I mean, it's all too popular for Fi and Fe to accuse each other of fakeness and hypocrisy, but it doesn't quite work like that. Intertype relations revolve around communication, values refer to certain types of information, not "values" as in moral or what you do with your life. So if you're IEI (which I see as perfectly possible), it's possible those you conflict with are mostly Delta, but I don't think most of what you said is socionically relevant.

I know how to deploy my emotions. Let's say that there's a psychic space between me and another human being. With what do I fill that space? Among other things, most prominently, I fill it with emotional expression. Whatever I say or do, I package it in what might be seen as emotional persuasion.

That does sound like Fe indeed.

As for controlling/containing, it's just that I am emotionally expressive. Let's say that emotion dwells very close to my surface, and it belongs there. If I have to push it farther down, so it is hidden, I become uneasy and don't feel like myself. And yet, as I've gotten older, I've increasingly inhabited social environments where I must match the subdued tone around me, believing I need to push the emotions down to a more hidden place, and it's very difficult, painful, self-denying to do this.

I mean, I can do it--no problem there, it's acting! But to do it day after day, year after year? Then it's something more serious.

Therefore I say I can't control my emotions well, because especially if I am squelching them, they pop up here and there despite my efforts to deny them. And anyone here will likely say that I should NOT do this in the first place, and no doubt they are correct.

This seems kind of universal. I mean, who doesn't feel like that when they can't be themselves, especially in long term?

[golden]

@ Aiss, thanks for the feedback. I'm just not sure how to isolate information elements and talk about them. And I'm not sure how to describe things in ways that are Socionically relevant.

[KeroZen]

Golden, I'm sorry (or not) but reading your thread I got the impression I was reading me...

Also don't bother explaining "Fi" people why us "Fe" people got the impression they don't like our "Fe" and find it inferior and why we find them too "feeling reserved / internalized" because from their point of view they got the impression they have equally strong (if not stronger feelings) and that ours are fake and made of thin paper...

I'm at the exact same point than you are typing wise, well no, say I'm 95% sure now that I'm IEI by my own definition of the functions (making you IEI too), but as people told us "bwah you come from MBTI which is flawed you have a wrong notion of all functions etc"...there's still 5% chance that what we call "Fi" is "Fe" and vice versa...and in this case we are EII...or I don't know what other type...because everything I observed thus far, including all people I typed, all intertype relations wouldn't make sense anymore..

Would be like a stacked cards castle collapsing....but you see, chances are low...and IEI always doubt about everything including themselves... but that could be another contradiction as I just read Ne is more about possibilities....searching possibilities...alternatives...doubt?!

Anyway if we are IEI or EII we do master Ni, Ne, Fe and Fi so we could find endless counter examples of us using one or the other. As you so nicely explained, we're able to do things we don't like (acting, or keeping things to us) even if it's not natural...but who don't in the end?

[KeroZen]

As you might have seen I'm trying to advance the current consensus on MBTI conversion (people think that I'm doomed to fail but I have something concrete and practical in mind) I want to spare people like us (and in fact about almost 100% of westerners discovering socionics *after* MBTI) the painful confusion of being both perpetually in doubts *and* bashed by the socionics community for supposedly getting things wrong (we are so naive?) while at the same time nobody is able to explain precisely why...

Did you read the article about information element semantics?

I'm not versed in English enough to be able to spot patterns in my own speech (because the style I use is surely the only one I know but if I could be more subtle I would) but maybe it will be insightful for you?

I recall for instance (and it's obvious in my previous sentence) that using "would" "could" a lot was characteristic of Ne...(hell another contradiction!!! against IEI!!! when will it end?!!)

"superfluous use of subjunctive forms of verbs ("who could've thought," "if he had," "I would," etc.)"

But in my case it's surely due to the translation...dunno...

[KeroZen]

Another paradox you evoked about "judging" people:

Again maybe we both get it wrong but I think we have the same definition of Fe and Fi. So here's a strange paradox from my point of view:

My Fe makes me express instantaneous expressions/judgments about things (ex: oh it's nice, it stinks, this guys sucks) which are perceived by Fi types as judgments! And I'm very upset every-time it happens because it wasn't intended to be a judgment at all!!

It's like Fi people extrapolate and think I said "I don't like this guy because he sucks" *but* omitted the first part of the phrase as if it was implicit...

Then I say "I didn't mean that" and they answer "if you didn't mean that why did you say it in the first place then?!!"

[Marie84]

Neither probably being humanitarian direcly translates into Fi either. In my opinion all NF's are humanitarian and interested in people, even if it is such a clishee coming from MBTI in this case I think it does apply (though it is still my personal opinion others might not share). So being humanitarian and being Fe valuing works just aswell.

from having volunteered in a few charitable causes I can say that Fi types are not the only people concerned with humanitarianism. In fact, most of the people I saw orchestrating everything were primarily Fe types and a few possible IEE's

[Beautiful sky]

I have Ni demonstrative and you have Fi demonstrative; that means, you and I can look like each other at any given moment, but because I love Si and because I am most comfortable with reading peoples feelings and interpreting them with Ne, giving them many possibilities to think about and you prefer Se, you are IEI; you know when you love Si, you really really love it -like me .

And, I'm crazy about you (those are my feelings for you). I think you're bright, fun, and I wish we were close enough to hang out and man shop..lol.

Because I have Ni as subconscious I can not connect ideas and express my emotions -Fi - very well, so I have to practice finding words to express my emotions and feelings; I read the feelings of my dual by recognizing which events caused the emotional responses; you, on the other hand, are very good with making associations and expressing ideas well.

[golden]

Golden, I'm sorry (or not) but reading your thread I got the impression I was reading me...

Also don't bother explaining "Fi" people why us "Fe" people got the impression they don't like our "Fe" and find it inferior and why we find them too "feeling reserved / internalized" because from their point of view they got the impression they have equally strong (if not stronger feelings) and that ours are fake and made of thin paper...

Well, working out how I view the information elements is a method of learning, and questioning my type is, too. In fact, I don't really think I'm not an IEI, but I'm open to being something else.

Two issues: is a highly internal process, and I said in the chatbox yesterday that I take it so for granted that it's almost invisible to me. I mean, to me, is simply "the way things are."

Your statements about vs interest me. I can see that dynamic--certain people having the sense that is shallow. Sometimes even I feel that my is shallow. I do use it to manipulate the surface, it lives at my surface, etc.

I'm at the exact same point than you are typing wise, well no, say I'm 95% sure now that I'm IEI by my own definition of the functions (making you IEI too), but as people told us "bwah you come from MBTI which is flawed you have a wrong notion of all functions etc"...there's still 5% chance that what we call "Fi" is "Fe" and vice versa...and in this case we are EII...or I don't know what other type...because everything I observed thus far, including all people I typed, all intertype relations wouldn't make sense anymore..

To be fair, people mostly haven't jumped on me here to tell me I'm not IEI. One person did initially, positing ENFp. A couple of people have made idle comments about me possibly seeming Delta, possibly INFj. (FYI, I was married to my Delta conflictor for a decade and with him two years before that, so it makes sense that I have modified my behavior a lot.)

Also, I'm not as young as many forum members and would say I might have made some modifications anyway--some to my benefit, some to my detriment.

Would be like a stacked cards castle collapsing....but you see, chances are low...and IEI always doubt about everything including themselves... but that could be another contradiction as I just read Ne is more about possibilities....searching possibilities...alternatives...doubt?!

Anyway if we are IEI or EII we do master Ni, Ne, Fe and Fi so we could find endless counter examples of us using one or the other. As you so nicely explained, we're able to do things we don't like (acting, or keeping things to us) even if it's not natural...but who don't in the end?

IEIs are in fact very flexible. We make masks and wear them often, ime. We can be what others want--for a while. This "talent" can lead to questions about the "true self." There's probably some Enneagram 4 stuff in this, too.

[golden]

I have Fe demonstrative and you have Fi demonstrative; that means, you and I can look like each other at any given moment, but because I love Si and because I am most comfortable with reading peoples feelings and interpreting them with Ne, giving them many possibilities to think about and you prefer Se, you are IEI; you know when you love Si, you really really love it -like me .

Your point is that INFp and INFj can resemble each other, but that I am IEI. And that latter bit--"I am IEI"--is the gist of the feedback I've gotten, here and in the chatbox.

You say you love Si and I prefer Se, which is pretty much what I said. But I guess I'm hoping to ascertain whether those statements are true. Do I actually love Se? What do I think Se even is? These ideas bear examining.

And, I'm crazy about you (those are my feelings for you). I think you're bright, fun, and I wish we were close enough to hang out and man shop..lol.

Thank you, Maritsa. If I'm in your neck of the woods I'll let you know, although man shopping is not my style. (Let's say that it's more like I'm running a boutique, and if a man wants to browse, I'll let him know if the store is open. ) But I'd be happy to accompany you on one of your own shopping expeditions.

Because I have Ni as subconscious I can not connect ideas and express my emotions -Fi - very well, so I have to practice finding words to express my emotions and feelings; I read the feelings of my dual by recognizing which events caused the emotional responses; you, on the other hand, are very good with making associations and expressing ideas well.

Here you make a solid case for me as INFp and NOT INFj. In a nutshell: expressing my emotions is natural as breathing for me, words and emotion are bound up together from the start, and reading my conflictor's (your dual's) feelings in this indirect manner is a process I completely resent. And conversely, at least in the case of my former conflictor partner, my ability to instantly paint the world of emotion doesn't help the ESTj. His doesn't help me, and my doesn't help him, period.

[KeroZen]

That's interesting.

About the masks thing, let's not forget that Esenin is an introverted Hamlet, so both might have some proficiency towards acting, wearing masks etc...

If Hamlet is the mentor, then Esenin would be the personal coach, excelling in 1 to 1 communication. And I'm for instance bloody good to make people talk about themselves, to make the black juice they have inside sometimes visible to me, through self confession, and to read the slightest expression/cue on their face/figure (even if it might be more focused on superficial details).

But note that it's said Esenin and Dostoyevsky both have strong empathic skills and can be "humanist" in their own way. But let's be honest, IEI empathy is way lighter than EII who in my eyes do posses the "real" empathy.

I think our empathy is of a "projection" kind. We're good to project ourselves consciously in someone's shoes, but it's an imaginative and directed process. EII's on the other hand seem to have a stronger and most unconscious empathy, something coming from the guts, they do suffer when one suffers.

To distinguish myself from my EII neighbor and friend, I found two details to be interesting and I'd like to hear what's your take on that you two! (I could be wrong of course so please correct me if I am) It could help you Golden be really sure.

1) EII can't stand graphical/images of pain/wounds/blood (as in seen directly by eyes or in real life) and look like if they were wounded themselves (strong reaction) While IEI tend to be more stoic in these cases (doesn't exclude strong internal reaction). And on the other side, IEI tend to have a similar strong external "ewww!" reaction when imagining pain/wounds (as in depicted orally by someone explaining a surgery or the like) where EII tend to be stoic there...

2) Golden, do you wear the Toutankhamon smile, yes or no? I do. Concrete example I posted elsewhere:

"Once I was at an audience, in a tribunal, and the judge told me:

"Mr XXXX why are you smiling? You're giving the audience the impression you don't take the situation seriously!"

I was already so embarrassed, it got even worse, so I had to apologize and told them some light joke to calm things down like:

"Would you prefer that I look sad instead?"..."

[golden]

About the masks thing, let's not forget that Esenin is an introverted Hamlet, so both might have some proficiency towards acting, wearing masks etc...

I'm a pretty good actress, but it's mainly because I can infuse words with natural feeling and project emotion. I left the performing-arts world because I felt I wasn't strong enough to deal with its grittier elements.

If Hamlet is the mentor, then Esenin would be the personal coach, excelling in 1 to 1 communication. And I'm for instance bloody good to make people talk about themselves, to make the black juice they have inside sometimes visible to me, through self confession, and to read the slightest expression/cue on their face/figure (even if it might be more focused on superficial details).

But note that it's said Esenin and Dostoyevsky both have strong empathic skills and can be "humanist" in their own way. But let's be honest, IEI empathy is way lighter than EII who in my eyes do posses the "real" empathy.

I think our empathy is of a "projection" kind. We're good to project ourselves consciously in someone's shoes, but it's an imaginative and directed process. EII's on the other hand seem to have a stronger and most unconscious empathy, something coming from the guts, they do suffer when one suffers.

To distinguish myself from my EII neighbor and friend, I found two details to be interesting and I'd like to hear what's your take on that you two! (I could be wrong of course so please correct me if I am) It could help you Golden be really sure.

The truth is that I am wary of such details. I find the big picture more accurate. But okay.

1) EII can't stand graphical/images of pain/wounds/blood (as in seen directly by eyes or in real life) and look like if they were wounded themselves (strong reaction) While IEI tend to be more stoic in these cases (doesn't exclude strong internal reaction). And on the other side, IEI tend to have a similar strong external "ewww!" reaction when imagining pain/wounds (as in depicted orally by someone explaining a surgery or the like) where EII tend to be stoic there...

2) Golden, do you wear the Toutankhamon smile, yes or no? I do. Concrete example I posted elsewhere:

"Once I was at an audience, in a tribunal, and the judge told me:

"Mr XXXX why are you smiling? You're giving the audience the impression you don't take the situation seriously!"

I was already so embarrassed, it got even worse, so I had to apologize and told them some light joke to calm things down like:

"Would you prefer that I look sad instead?"..."

A. Blood and Guts

The answer: I'm inconsistent in my reactions.

Graphic, violent imagery never bothered me too much until I had a child. Then I couldn't stand it at all anymore. The change was that while watching a violent film, I would start involuntarily imagining the people I care about, above all my baby, in physical danger or pain. It was scary, mainly b/c I couldn't control the flights of imagination; it was like I was losing my mind.

Now I am at a point where sometimes I can handle that kind of imagery again, because it doesn't seem very real to me. Yet overall I dislike it intensely. However, ALL TV and films affect me overly strongly, in part because I don't watch them all that much. The joke with me is that I'm so sensitive to onscreen images and the inherent stress inducement of character and story, I can barely even watch the British comedy Fawlty Towers.

The first time I ever saw images of blood (in maybe 3rd grade, some biology film), I nearly passed out. I absolutely couldn't deal. I was the only kid in the class who reacted that way. A few years ago my son had a potentially serious medical condition--it looked like possible leukemia (but wasn't, thank God). He had to have a ton of blood drawn, and I was holding him while it was done, and I had to lie down for a while. But sometimes I've seen people have major blood draws and been unaffected. The whole cold context of a hospital or clinic freaks me out to start with, though.

If someone is in a real physical emergency outside a clinical context and hurt, no matter how messed up or bloody or whatever they are, it doesn't bother me. I can spring into action and help. Later I might replay the "bad" images in my mind, but I'm probably more likely than the average person NOT to go "ew" in that kind of situation. I can sort of dissociate from whatever seems gross or scary in an emergency.

B. Tutankhamun Smile

Sometimes I have this smile, other times I don't. I would call it my primary positive social mask, my starting facial position for interacting with other people. But if I am really tired or if I don't care about engaging with someone, don't want to be approached, etc., I will not wear such a smile. Sometimes I find that men I don't know find this expression inviting, and I don't want them to, and in that case I certainly will not be seen with the smile.

But as I implied, I really don't think that a person can be typed on the basis of a couple of details from Socionics descriptions. I can find something in any of those descriptions that applies to me quite neatly: the Forer effect.

[golden]

I would be EII according to that description but I think that I am IEI ...mmm

Right. And I also think you are IEI and not EII. Which only underscores that the detail is not so useful for typing purpose.

[KeroZen]

You are surely right in the sense these details are not good enough for typing purposes but they might be good clues sometimes.

It's fun because you said "The change was that while watching a violent film, I would start involuntarily imagining the people I care about, above all my baby, in physical danger or pain." and that's precisely the difference I tried to explain.

The reaction is equally strong in both types but for me it's only when it's imagined, when I'm projecting into it. Hence I'm surely more stoic and cold-blooded in front of a real-life wound (don't forget that I'm a man though) and even in distress situations I can be very cold blooded and help the person reacting very quickly.

But for instance if someone show me say his wounded but banded arm, I won't have any reaction until the person starts explaining me what the doctors did ("they cut this tissue here and extracted the shard there you see...") there I go "ewwwwww!" because I projected the pain the person should have suffered.

As for the Gargarin smile, when I don't wear it, I look kinda melancholic. I resonate with your "primary positive social mask" metaphor, and it's sometimes not the appropriate mask so it's not always "on" of course.

When in active social behavior it's very different though.

[KeroZen]

I don't want while talking about wounds to re-open yours, but you say you've been in a conflict relation for that long?

How did this happen? Did the conflicts become apparent only after a long interaction? Do you mind talking about it on a perceived inter-type relation level?

[golden]

I don't want while talking about wounds to re-open yours, but you say you've been in a conflict relation for that long?

How did this happen? Did the conflicts become apparent only after a long interaction? Do you mind talking about it on a perceived inter-type relation level?

I'm sure people on this board are long since tired of this tale. And 12 years is a long time, so boiling it down to a couple of sentences is hard to do. If you want, I'll write it up and PM you.

[KeroZen]

Oh no don't! The simplest thing would be that I locate your old posts on my own if you already expressed in once.

In French we got an idiomatic that reads: "retourner le couteau dans la plaie" (turning/screwing the knife in an open wound; i.e. insisting on something already painful)

...and that's precisely what I want to avoid.

[Aiss]

It's fun because you said "The change was that while watching a violent film, I would start involuntarily imagining the people I care about, above all my baby, in physical danger or pain." and that's precisely the difference I tried to explain.

The reaction is equally strong in both types but for me it's only when it's imagined, when I'm projecting into it. Hence I'm surely more stoic and cold-blooded in front of a real-life wound (don't forget that I'm a man though) and even in distress situations I can be very cold blooded and help the person reacting very quickly.

But for instance if someone show me say his wounded but banded arm, I won't have any reaction until the person starts explaining me what the doctors did ("they cut this tissue here and extracted the shard there you see...") there I go "ewwwwww!" because I projected the pain the person should have suffered.

Sounds human related to me. Not Fi or Fe, at any rate. IMO, of course.

[KeroZen]

Yes, unsure how significant of anything this really is, or if it's socionics related at all... I just wanted to probe if there was a trend or not at all.

Some types seem less empathetic than others though, but they might just be hiding it.

[Beautiful sky]

Two specific other moms come to mind. One of them is from a very humanitarian family that has wealth and created a foundation to fund various worthy causes. She's lovely, kind, contained, soft, an excellent parent, and has a quiet but obvious community spirit. She clearly embodies right and wrong. No one could ever imagine her doing a real moral misdeed. I like her sincerely but feel very apart from someone like her. I feel inferior, I feel gauche, I feel ridiculous. In this little world we have shared, she stands for something selfless and good, and I seem to be just plain out of it.

But I also could critique this woman, and mothers like her, because they have a narrow sense of right and wrong and it pisses me way off. For example, there is another mom in our kids' class who is from a very impoverished background and struggles with basic things like not using drugs, having an income, having a place to live, not being abused by her ne'er-do-well husband. To top it off, the woman is not exactly likeable, and her child is a terror. So when the woman was faced with eviction from her apartment after her husband abandoned her (again) last year in favor of a drug bender, who stepped in to help the woman? That's right, me.

And it's not that I relish doing a good deed, nor that I enjoy the woman's company, as she's a major pain in the ass. But the principle of the thing is that she has had a really rotten life and never gotten a fighting chance. And I'll be damned if I'll just sit by while people like the uber-nice right-and-wrong moms cozily ignore someone's real suffering. And it pisses me off that some of those moms seem to think that by merely in assisting (or even saying hello to) someone who is dirty, impoverished, uneducated, and low-class they will somehow be tarnished by direct association.

This story might speak of some EII and certainly of a lot of SEE, who, by the way are a lot more narrow scoping then the Ne - possibilities seeing and empathetic EII. Please keep it in mind that Gamma Fi is a lot more religious then the Delta, who are humanitarian - just as the name calls for it (in situations where the Fi/Ne valuer is healthy, as in is not facing selfish pursuits).