the ignoring function

[ladyinred]

how is it that we use it well without hurting the PoLR of the dual?

this is my understanding, that we take action in the area of the ignoring function appropriately, whatever that means, and well but we do not focus on it nor draw attention of others to it.

some one can give more clarity??

[ladyinred]

For one, you may be confusing the Ignoring function with the Demonstrative function which would be the same function containing the dual's PoLR.

yes, you are right

okay.

so, how do we use our demonstrative function so well while avoiding awkwardness in harming dual's weak spot??

and how does ignoring function even work?? as a proably EIE i think i understand Fi but i dont pay it much attention i am just good at understanding it. i deal in Fe though, Fi just seems to accompany that and i am aware of some times bashing Fi for Fe purpose.

so, clarification on IGNORING function please?

[EyeSeeCold]

Hmm. Well in relation to your dual, the ignoring function is ignored to give your dual some relief as they are constantly under attack for it being weak. What your dual benefits from, besides a clear mind, is advice when a situation becomes urgent and the matter needs to be brought to their attention.


I'll give you anecdotal descriptions:

Some weeks ago my SEE sister and I were given a task by our mother(ESE btw) to clean up our whole house as we were getting new furniture. My sister was working extra hard, being aggressive as she is, while I was doing things here and there while constantly returning to the computer to browse the web(Leading-Role alternating). The people were coming by any second and my sections were barely cleaned, I just didn't feel the need to work so hard for something so unimportant. I did manage to clean up some large piles of stuff, but for the most part it kind of looked like I did nothing, especially from the viewpoint of my sister.

Well when she came and saw that I did not have everything cleared she blew up in my face and proceeeded to berate me for not doing what I was supposed to do, claiming that I did nothing all day and then got on my case about my inattentiveness to my appearance and for basically being a slob. We got into a heated argument, she was still criticizing me, but I was trying to calm her down without losing my temper. I repeatedly was telling her that there was no need to worry about rushing, that we had all day. She started to throw all of my personal stuff away, when I told her I can clean up just "give me time to do it". In her aggravated state she failed to realize I could clean up in time and began to haphazardly take over my sections. She said I had problems and all this and I said that not everyone is similar, I can't be compared to everyone else in my ability to work hard.

When the whole thing was over, I pointed out to her that she has weaknesses too, but I don't get on her case about it because I realize this about everyone and I understand her and see beyond that().

It's worth noting that about 30 minutes later we returned to normal, and the next day it was like nothing happened.

As for the demonstrating function, on one occasion, people were laughing at a photo of me when I fell off a scooter when I was young and someone made a comment about me being on drugs and my sister stepped in and ordered everyone to not joke like that because it's mean. I didn't feel any criticism and shrugged the comment off and made a joke about myself. Otherwise I could have felt singled out and helpless, as I don't usually like to joke about other people.

[FDG]

Generally it's "good" to "hurt" your dual with your demonstrative function if it's truly necessary i.e. if they're excessively focussing on their creative function at the expense of their PoLR.

[EyeSeeCold]

Generally it's "good" to "hurt" your dual with your demonstrative function if it's truly necessary i.e. if they're excessively focussing on their creative function at the expense of their PoLR.

For example when Fi creative is being generous, Ti demonstrative steps in and tactfully lays out the steps to correct the problem, in a logical manner. In duality, the information isn't as imposing. I've experienced the feedback loop at least twice and another I stood back and waited to step in. My sister doesn't know how to not be nice. >.<

[tcaudilllg]

Here's what I understand about id block:
Firstly, it's unvalued. What this means in practice is that it's divided between right and left in political terms, and positivist vs negativist in personal terms. What does this mean in practice? It means that you're going to try to ignore one or the other because it's not that interesting. Your interpretation of these functions is strong, but unabashedly biased. It's like being completely (or mostly) blind to half the world -- you see the glass through these functions either completely empty or completely full -- there is no "half" about it UNLESS you are 1) corrected, and 2) accept correction. The demonstrative function sees through two such "eyes" in this mode. Each eye sees its own half of the world, without seeing where the two halves intersect. (this distinguishes it from, say, the base function). The ignoring function has only one eye, preferring to completely disregard . This is why it ignores: it doesn't ignore every argument, just arguments which don't fit in its single eye. If the individual is a positivist, the function ignores the significance of negative states. If a negativist, it ignores the potential for improvement.

This goes doubly for the PoLR, although the PoLR is even more oblivious.

[WVBRY]

I think you are likley to criticise your dual's role function through your seventh function.

This is what I understand about the seventh; its unvalued, one tried to restrain it in oneself, though not necessarily in others. Secondly it assesses information accuratly. They may encourage it in others, or criticise it, depending on how well others are using it. This is where you get into approval in supervision relations, where the supervisor sees the potential of the supervisee and judges them via their seventh function which is the supervisee's hidden agenda.

As far as not criticising your dual's polr is concerned, id say the eight function is something the individual has in large quantities but is desperate to rid of in favor of the sixth. I think a person can show others, by demonstrating, how to use their eight function, but not by critising or pressuring others. Thats how it avoids hitting the duals polr.

[WVBRY]

my understanding is that the Ignoring function is understood easily, automatically, and well enough that people don't expect or want others to help them with it. however, it is used privately and is not directly verbalized; people do that using their preferred Ego functions. i think people take Id block information seriously to an extent, but not to the point where it will override the Ego block.

the Ignoring function, while "strong", clashes directly with the preferred Base function, so people try to to limit its use when dealing with others. this may manifest in someone attempting to shut down someone else who is "pushing" that kind of information too much - literally trying to "ignore" it. the information is viewed as irrelevant, unimportant, and/or superfluous relative to the Base function.

for example, as an IEI, my Base function is , and my Ignoring function is . i find that in any given situation, an IEE or ILE will often treat many potential outcomes as if they were all equally likely to happen, and act on this. as an dominant, i find this a waste to think about, because my knows what outcome/s is the most likely to actually happen. because my is strong, i know that other possibilities do exist, but my overrides this information enough to the point where i don't take it as seriously as the dominant. therefore, i "ignore" the unlikely outcomes, and act according to the information from my preferred/valued Base function.

Im not IEI but i would imagine that the IEI's while restrained in themselves isnt necessarily something you would try to restain in others, unless is directly interferes with your own use of , of course. I use Fe in myself both asses my own emotions, and the emotional behavior of literally everyone I meet, but if someone lacks, or doesnt use it well, or does use it well that for some reason troubles me because I can see they can get into trouble (ie supervisee) or they can lock down relations and get me into trouble (ie beneficiary), who are usually good at using Fi and I feel that I can see what they are doing with it so as to not let myself be influenced by it(while I see others being influenced by SEEs Fi all the time).

[Marie84]

so, how do we use our demonstrative function so well while avoiding awkwardness in harming dual's weak spot??

Because you devalue it, thus don't see it as important or worthy of critique when someone is weak at it.
I would guess in your case you have an easy time thinking about multiple possibilities and novel obscurities, but you see these things as being less important to the overall picture. You'll use Ne for mental notes just in case its needed, but you'll rely on Ni by focusing on the probability, which is more steadfast and less ambiguous than Ne. So your ideas (Ne) are not ideas for the sake of curiousness as much as they are information to formulate a more precise concept.
LSI's are not bothered by this since you're not applying Ne in a way that they would deem as pointless or confusing, rather you're using it to back-up the Ni, which would likely make them feel more secure, since you thought of all the potential issues that they couldn't. I think Ne PoLR's, despite their concrete nature, tend to worry about all the things that could go wrong and need someone who can calm them without making them feel up-tight.

Growing-up with one, for instance, I noticed this type of negative thinking patterns, like checking to see if all the doors to the outside are locked everyday, thinking lighting a candle and walking away will cause a fire, locking the doors in the car even when park and someones in the car, etc.
It seems to be a paranoid association of the Ne PoLR, all the "bad things that could happen", or at least I see it as such, and Ni might just see it as "thinking ahead" which is exactly what the Ne PoLR is doing in these scenarios

to give an example of what I'm referring to;

LSI: *locks front door, puts chain lock on too. Checks to make sure backdoor is securely locked-shut*
Me: "you know, if someone wanted to break in here those locks won't matter. The back door is made of pure glass, all they would have to do is bust it and walk right in, and the front door has glass panels they could break and than simply unlock the locks and open the door*
LSI: *blank expression*

LSI is not looking for all the ways somebody could bypass the locked doors and get in anyways, they're looking at the Ni, the scenario of someone breaking in, not all the ways they could do it (Ne). The LSI doesn't need someone to point these possibilities out so bluntly, whereas an Ni type might comfort them by saying that someone will probably not break-in but locking the doors will at least make it harder for them to do so, thus there's no need to point out why doing it (making sure the doors are all locked) is pointless

and how does ignoring function even work?? as a proably EIE i think i understand Fi but i dont pay it much attention i am just good at understanding it. i deal in Fe though, Fi just seems to accompany that and i am aware of some times bashing Fi for Fe purpose.

so, clarification on IGNORING function please?

I'll get back to you on this

[EyeSeeCold]

^Wow I say the same thing about burglary all the time. I'm Ni leading.

[717495]

I always automatically lock every door without noting, and it really pisses some people off. They think I'm paranoid though, I'm not, it's just an automatic safety precaution I'm not even aware of.

I do get kind of paranoid when I hear noises outside though. Like if a loud plane flies directly over my house in the middle of the night I will get up and start panicking, mostly because it fits in my dreams as something bad happening, and I've also been known to jump out of my dreams for no reason, it seems like I'm staring into blank space, then all of a sudden an object appears and I wake up.

[Blaze]

yes, you are right

okay.

so, how do we use our demonstrative function so well while avoiding awkwardness in harming dual's weak spot??

and how does ignoring function even work?? as a proably EIE i think i understand Fi but i dont pay it much attention i am just good at understanding it. i deal in Fe though, Fi just seems to accompany that and i am aware of some times bashing Fi for Fe purpose.

so, clarification on IGNORING function please?

these are great questions. to answer them i have to think of how i look at things and try to apply it that way.

Ni ignoring-Ne leading: basically i don't care about the trend and what most people are doing and about how which things will be important enough to be sucked along into the timeline vortex, since that vortex leaves out all the outlying possibilities that i am most interested in.

Ne leading is kind of like lighting the fuse on a whole bunch of things at once. some of them will get sucked into the timeline/vortex and some will just explode like fireworks and that will be the end of it. but i don't really want to abandon anything just because it might not make it into the flow of where the majority finds itself.

if i pay attention to Ni, then i would have to abandon Ne, which i can't do because Ne type things are what interest me most. Ni type things interest me least, mostly because Ni is about mainstream majority events and choices which are already self evident and known. BORING

the one exception is when it is fun to look back on the timeline to see what ended up being important. and it's fun to discuss what will be important in terms of future trends. and then compare these to what i'm doing and how i can sell what i'm doing, given the overall direction. however, when i think about what i actually pay attention to day in and day out, it's Ne not Ni.

Te demonstrative/Ti creative: with Ti, i look at things in terms of mini structures that can be applied here and there. what structures work which ones don't. i look for consistency and discrepancy and logical correctness. categories have to make sense or throw them out. use them loosely because they usually don't apply to everything.

i can use Te relatively readily though. assign me a project where i have to collect facts and data and trend things out dynamically and it will be interesting, although i have to apply a moderate amount of effort. it's not as natural, but i find that i am willing to do it, more willing to use it than to use Ni.

so, Ti/Te are more interchangeable by a large margin than Ne/Ni. with Ti and Te, i can shift fast. this may be due to the flexibility of the creative function. with Ne, i'm flexible about a broad expanse of possibilities and i resist the notion that i have to go with what the majority thinks or wants. with Ne/Ni, i probably could shift fast between the two, but i don't want to.

/edit. to answer the question about how we avoid slapping our dual's (and illusionary's) polr. i think we end up taking over responsibilities related to their polr for them. duals naturally divide responsibilities and handle what the partner finds difficult. we would also explain things related to their polr via our creative function. so, if i have a complicated table of data that i had to explain to a Te polr, i'd just simplify it either by interpreting it for the person or by boiling it down to the basics. but we don't ignore 8th function information.

with the dual's role function (our ignoring), we do kind of ignore that aspect of information already. and the dual tries to get by with a basic understanding of it...which makes any behavior or mis-steps that the dual has related to this function even easier to ignore.

this is what makes a dual or an illusionary even more helpful than an activity partner. our activity partner ignores our polr, which isn't good for growth and development (but it's great for being friends with people...you basically ignore their flaws, right?) because polr problems tend to compile and increase exponentially if not addressed.

role function problems are much less intense and evident than polr problems, and, people can even improve somewhat on their own steam in the role function. so the fact that the dual ignores the role function problems isn't a big deal.

as an aside, i think this is the reason semi dual relations are more limited than illusionary...partners can do nothing for the polr of the other person and differences in expectations result in persistent misunderstandings that are never resolved.

[KeroZen]

Many nice posts, esp. Marie84 and Blaze.

[ladyinred]

these are GREAT responses, very helpful. thank you all!!

i will reply in greater depth once ive thought more on the topic, youve given me a LOT to ponder

[07490]

Marie84 explained it pretty well there.

[07490]

LSI: *locks front door, puts chain lock on too. Checks to make sure backdoor is securely locked-shut*
Me: "you know, if someone wanted to break in here those locks won't matter. The back door is made of pure glass, all they would have to do is bust it and walk right in, and the front door has glass panels they could break and than simply unlock the locks and open the door*
LSI: *blank expression*

^^^ about this and why Ne bothers us is that, like for example, if you live in a house with ordinary window, if people were to really want to break in, yes, they can break the window without cracking the front door, or they could have been a skilled lock-picker, or they could have sneak in from the roof, or they could have force the door to be open. yes they could have all done that, but that doesn't mean that everyone should not lock their door, and leave it wide open. or try to seal the roof, or get a bullet proof door, etc... you can think of million of possible possibility, but it's unrealistic to try to fix all of this possibilities. Introvert intuition forecast statistic & probability. if we were to think of the million scenario of what could go wrong without weeping the likeness that something probably wouldn't happen, the picture becomes clearer for us to focus on, to a few likelihood of event which complements the work of extrovert sensing and how we can go on to fix it.

[ashlesha]

^^^ about this and why Ne bothers us is that, like for example, if you live in a house with ordinary window, if people were to really want to break in, yes, they can break the window without cracking the front door, or they could have been a skilled lock-picker, or they could have sneak in from the roof, or they could have force the door to be open. yes they could have all done that, but that doesn't mean that everyone should not lock their door, and leave it wide open. or try to seal the roof, or get a bullet proof door, etc... you can think of million of possible possibility, but it's unrealistic to try to fix all of this possibilities. Introvert intuition forecast statistic & probability. if we were to think of the million scenario of what could go wrong without weeping the likeness that something probably wouldn't happen, the picture becomes clearer for us to focus on, to a few likelihood of event which complements the work of extrovert sensing and how we can go on to fix it.

but those possibilities still exist whether you say them out loud and/or give them credence or not.

along with all the possibilities that neither of us could think of. they're still out there...floating around in reality somewhere.

AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!11!!1!!!!!!!!!!!

i don't know if i want to be Ne ego.

[Marie84]

^Wow I say the same thing about burglary all the time. I'm Ni leading.

what part?

I always lock doors as well, being raised to do so by parents who always demand the doors be locked if we all leave the house, at certain times, etc despite living in a very, very safe neighborhood. (Parents are ESI and LSE).

Best friend (ILE) and family is more the opposite (SLI and IEI). We always have our front door locked. They rarely have it locked (and so could walk right in and sometimes do if I am with my friend). I used to have to tell ILE "lock your car door" and stuff like that. Now I don't. I think a lot of it has to do with immediate influences. My parents also lived in some big cities where you couldn't take chances with your security unless you wanted someone to rob you blindly.

So I do it out of habit though I usually can gauge my immediate surroundings and tell if I am taking chances or not. But often I do things just because I am supposed to (i.e. I never leave items unattended, but if I have friends or peers who I have 'gotten to know' somewhat, I might just ask to have my items looked after, even if the likelihood of someone taking stuff is low.)...mostly because I can imagine LSE having a freak out session if I didn't...kidding, it actually does make sense. You shouldn't be paranoid but shouldn't take things for granted, either.

I used to be paranoid about helicopters and stuff but only because I was young and read too many things from conspiracy sites off the net. I could care less, now and strive towards a more realist grasp on life for my own comfort and psychological stability, knowing how damaging it was to my emotional health when I entertained such crazy BS (in my view). Paranoia just makes me ill inside. But safety precautions are not the same as paranoia. They're just practical. I, all appearances and loopy ideas, sniveling sentiments, and off-beat interests aside, like to be practical first and foremost. And I can't really say that that or any of this is that related to type or anything, just upbringing, or something.

fwiw, I don't want to suggest that I don't lock doors or that it's a type related thing, I was just using how my father, in that example, is overtly paranoid about negative scenarios while simultaneously not thinking through the probabilities of said scenarios happenings as well as all the other potentials surrounding them

Many nice posts, esp. Marie84 and Blaze.

^^^ about this and why Ne bothers us is that, like for example, if you live in a house with ordinary window, if people were to really want to break in, yes, they can break the window without cracking the front door, or they could have been a skilled lock-picker, or they could have sneak in from the roof, or they could have force the door to be open. yes they could have all done that, but that doesn't mean that everyone should not lock their door, and leave it wide open. or try to seal the roof, or get a bullet proof door, etc... you can think of million of possible possibility, but it's unrealistic to try to fix all of this possibilities.

Introvert intuition forecast statistic & probability. if we were to think of the million scenario of what could go wrong without weeping the likeness that something probably wouldn't happen, the picture becomes clearer for us to focus on, to a few likelihood of event which complements the work of extrovert sensing and how we can go on to fix it.

In terms of that example, I'm really not paranoid about things like break-ins, nor do I purposely keep the doors unlocked, rather I'm not obsessive about these things in contrast to my father.
My point was basically that he puts a lot of effort and thinking into "possible bad scenarios" rather than weighing them against the probability of them happening, or all the ways they could happen despite all his effort in focusing on minute ways of preventing them

It's rather comparable to the paranoia of Ni PoLR who may compensate for it by applying a lot of energy into needless situational tasks rather than contemplating on how they will benefit them in the long-run.
Ni PoLR's are running away from the ticking clock and Ne PoLR's are running right to it; both are overlooking and bypassing a lot of "in-between". I suppose this applies to Se dominants and to a degree Si dominants, too

[EyeSeeCold]

what part?

to give an example of what I'm referring to;

LSI: *locks front door, puts chain lock on too. Checks to make sure backdoor is securely locked-shut*
Me: "you know, if someone wanted to break in here those locks won't matter. The back door is made of pure glass, all they would have to do is bust it and walk right in, and the front door has glass panels they could break and than simply unlock the locks and open the door*
LSI: *blank expression*

But I think you may have portrayed it incorrectly, granted there are increments of perspectives you can take on Ni vs Ne.

Usually my mother/grandmother will freak out over potential causes for danger and I cut out all the improbable scenarios and say that "it's unlikely" or when referring to the front door, "If someone wanted to break in, the lock on the door won't matter". In the scenario you provided it seems the LSI is focusing on though.

[07490]

In terms of that example, I'm really not paranoid about things like break-ins, nor do purposely keep the doors unlocked, rather I'm not obsessive about these things in contrast to my father.

Enneargram 1 LSI can be very obessive with it, very pragmatic and dogmatic in these matters, especially if they got Sp in the first or second block.

My point was basically that he puts a lot of effort and thinking into "possible bad scenarios" rather than weighing them against the probability of them happening, or all the ways they could happen despite all his effort in focusing on minute ways of preventing them

Not that I don't think your point is invalid, when looking at a different angle. But the quote that you initially brought up is something I often face with XII. these kind of comments does get interpreted as sarcastic and biting, at least it is out of the content and not helping the situations. and causes frustrations. I guess when someone is a extrovert sensing valuer, they naturally down play any possibilities that doesn't hold solid ground. and prefer a more of a pragmatic approach. and judging your comment made by how the moment unfolded, it would be taken as an offense. What we don't want is a unhealthy XII sarcastic comment that is thought up right then and there just to diss you. (Not saying this was your purpose to your father, but how some unhealthy XII will come across.)

[Words]

Me: " you know, if someone wanted to break in here those locks won't matter. The back door is made of pure glass, all they would have to do is bust it and walk right in, and the front door has glass panels they could break and than simply unlock the locks and open the door simply unlock the locks and open the door open the door*

1. Many thieves are opportunistic and simply try door handles.
2. If there's not a forced break in you may have trouble with your insurance company
3. What type of glass is it? Glass doors here are toughened glass usually at least double glazed.
4. If you want to say they could smash the glass door, then why not smash the glass windows or drive a truck through one of the brick walls?

[Marie84]

But I think you may have portrayed it incorrectly, granted there are increments of perspectives you can take on Ni vs Ne.

Usually my mother/grandmother will freak out over potential causes for danger and I cut out all the improbable scenarios and say that "it's unlikely" or when referring to the front door, "If someone wanted to break in, the lock on the door won't matter". In the scenario you provided it seems the LSI is focusing on though.

The example was referring to how an Ne-PoLR dealt with Ne, rather than how Ne PoLR works as is. So yes, the scenario was meant to show LSI focusing on Ne (sorry if I wasn't clear on this prior, my bad)

Not that I don't think your point is invalid, when looking at a different angle. But the quote that you initially brought up is something I often face with XII. these kind of comments does get interpreted as sarcastic and biting, at least it is out of the content and not helping the situations. and causes frustrations.
I guess when someone is a extrovert sensing valuer, they naturally down play any possibilities that doesn't hold solid ground. and prefer a more of a pragmatic approach. and judging your comment made by how the moment unfolded, it would be taken as an offense. What we don't want is a unhealthy XII sarcastic comment that is thought up right then and there just to diss you. (Not saying this was your purpose to your father, but how some unhealthy XII will come across.)

They weren't really verbatim examples. The point of it really wasn't to show how one way of thinking is superior or how one should deal with contrasting views in these situations, nor am I intentionally defending my reply or condemning my fathers reasoning skills

[07490]

The example was referring to how an Ne-PoLR dealt with Ne, rather than how Ne PoLR works as is. So yes, the scenario was meant to show LSI focusing on Ne (sorry if I wasn't clear on this prior, my bad)



They weren't really verbatim examples. The point of it really wasn't to show how one way of thinking is superior or how one should deal with contrasting views in these situations, nor am I intentionally defending my reply or condemning my fathers reasoning skills

Please also don't take my reply as an attack on you. I just happen to think of an some XII which I would categorized as less than healthy. And I wouldn't judge you based on your quote between you and your father. I know too little about your family for me to say that. My post was really my response to my interaction with the Xii, not really you and your father. You seem quite reasonable of a person anyway and is fair abiding with your morals. I can tell you the truth that the only main problem I will/have with XII is if they have somehow skew their Fi or Ti and completely only trying to protect their polr. In protecting their polr I mean they become objectively sarcastic or over the top with aggression (usually LII).

[Marie84]

Please also don't take my reply as an attack on you. I just happen to think of an some XII which I would categorized as less than healthy. And I wouldn't judge you based on your quote between you and your father. I know too little about your family for me to say that. My post was really my response to my interaction with the Xii, not really you and your father. You seem quite reasonable of a person anyway and is fair abiding with your morals. I can tell you the truth that the only main problem I will/have with XII is if they have somehow skew their Fi or Ti and completely only trying to protect their polr. In protecting their polr I mean they become objectively sarcastic or over the top with aggression (usually LII).

ah okay

[Creepy-Snaps]

To put things simply, generally, without specific examples or long explanations:

Your 7th function, ignoring function, is ignored in preference of your 1st function. Your 7th function corresponds with your dual's 3rd function, which is very weak. You ignore your dual's weakness.

Your 8th function is used humorously to defend your 1st and 4th functions. It corresponds with your dual's 4th function, which is vulnerable, affecting their understanding and what they take very seriously. You relax your dual where they are most sensitive.

[golden]

To put things simply, generally, without specific examples or long explanations:

Your 7th function, ignoring function, is ignored in preference of your 1st function. Your 7th function corresponds with your dual's 3rd function, which is very weak. You ignore your dual's weakness.

Your 8th function is used humorously to defend your 1st and 4th functions. It corresponds with your dual's 4th function, which is vulnerable, affecting their understanding and what they take very seriously. You relax your dual where they are most sensitive.

I like this tidy explanation. So ... when I make a pouty face and say, "Hey! You huwt my widdle feewings," and my dual laughs, is that an example of the bolded?

I'm trying to think of how Te-themed humor might go.