Differences between ESE-ESFj and LSE-ESTj

[Beautiful sky]

I'm trying to type a friend and I can't decide which one of these he is; both types have a sense of humor, both are into humor. There are so many commonalities that I can't decided which one he is.

[Saberstorm]

Tom Cruise = ESFj




Herman Munster = ESTj

[Anglas]

@Maritsa, how many types have good sense of humor?

[Creepy-Snaps]

I'm trying to type a friend and I can't decide which one of these he is; both types have a sense of humor, both are into humor. There are so many commonalities that I can't decided which one he is.

Hmm, ESFj or ESTj, not sure if I can relate. Well if you want our help, at least provide some more information. What type of things do they joke about?

[glam]

i would say both types can have good senses of humor, and be animated & smiley. this might be applicable to all Ej temperament types due to having extraverted dynamic elements - Fe (expression, motivation, emotional influence, etc.) & Te (beneficial action, activity, movement, etc.) - as their Base and Role functions.

my observations of these types IRL:

ESE: socially smooth like nobody's business - always know the right thing to say and how to respond to people. know a ton of people, easily connect and make friends. loud and will freely express their emotions (both positive & negative). dress fashionably and with taste. can be generous (e.g. buying drinks for the group at a bar) and thus end up spending too much money.

LSE: not as confident at expressing their real emotions (unlike ESE) so may do things like let their anger build up inside and eventually rage all at once. i often see male LSEs wearing a similar kind of outfit every single day that is basic, functional, & not terribly fashionable. typically cheap & don't like spending money.

both types may look like social butterflies but the difference is that socializing, having fun, and being around people is actually the ESE's goal, while the LSE's real reason for it is often because it's beneficial to their interests or their work or something.

[Beautiful sky]

i would say both types can have good senses of humor, and be animated & smiley. this might be applicable to all Ej temperament types due to having extraverted dynamic elements - Fe (expression, motivation, emotional influence, etc.) & Te (beneficial action, activity, movement, etc.) - as their Base and Role functions.

my observations of these types IRL:

ESE: socially smooth like nobody's business - always know the right thing to say and how to respond to people. know a ton of people, easily connect and make friends. loud and will freely express their emotions (both positive & negative). dress fashionably and with taste. can be generous (e.g. buying drinks for the group at a bar) and thus end up spending too much money.

LSE: not as confident at expressing their real emotions (unlike ESE) so may do things like let their anger build up inside and eventually rage all at once. i often see male LSEs wearing a similar kind of outfit every single day that is basic, functional, & not terribly fashionable. typically cheap & don't like spending money.

both types may look like social butterflies but the difference is that socializing, having fun, and being around people is actually the ESE's goal, while the LSE's real reason for it is often because it's beneficial to their interests or their work or something.

Thanks Glam, but none of this helps.

For instance, my sister and cousin are both ESE and so are a ton of my friends; the only things that I notice to be different between the ESE and LSE is that LSE will say the right things in a given situation, when they say it that becomes non argumentative; ESE just let their thoughts about something flow easily and these thoughts are usually their ethics regarding what people are doing that may be considered right or wrong.


LSE come off more insecure, IMO, but there's exception to this as well, an LSE who just doesn't care about how he's perceived may come off aggressive, direct, non ethical; an LSE who has money can dress to the 9's, just as an ESE would; they are both aesthetic and both want nice/pleasant surrounding.


His humor is much closer to that of Sean Penn, "I say they should all be shot." It's more direct, violent approach as opposed to more sarcasm.

Looking at this from DS, I would think that ESE are much more emotional than cold and logical, like LSE, but there again come situations where the LSE becomes emotionally expressive; there are too many cross variables to consider if I'm, or we're going to look at this behaviorally.

[stray]

The only time I see an LSE's Fe is when they're drunk, having some "I love you man!" moment and reminscing about things. And I can stay quiet around it without them getting too butthurt.

[Beautiful sky]

I don't know about that; my LSE cousin is pretty darn emotional even when not drunk; she was hosting an oscar party one year and one of my cousins begrudgingly decided not to show up. My ESE sister said "If she doesn't want to come, that's her business, leave her make her own decisions." But, wanting closeness and family, my LSE cousin called her up and got very emotional on the phone, cried about why when she invites people they just won't put their differences aside and show up.

Her tender, crying emotions show up every once in a while. I don't know how this is different from Fe?

[stray]

I don't know about that; my LSE cousin is pretty darn emotional even when not drunk; she was hosting an oscar party one year and one of my cousins begrudgingly decided not to show up. My ESE sister said "If she doesn't want to come, that's her business, leave her make her own decisions." But, wanting closeness and family, my LSE cousin called her up and got very emotional on the phone, cried about why when she invites people they just won't put their differences aside and show up.

That sounds like it has more to do with control than Fe per se.

[Beautiful sky]

I don't get it; these two types have only a few similarities

Ej temperament
and 4 Dichotomies

in common yet they behave and look so much the same especially if they are very close together in their grey zones.

[Beautiful sky]

That sounds like it has more to do with control than Fe per se.

really? what do you mean?

[stray]

really? what do you mean?

It just sounds like she was upset because her event didn't go as planned. Maybe her annoyance wasn't about the people specifically, but the event itself. If there's something that pisses off LSE and LSI, I think it's when unpredictable things happen like that. And her emotions seem to be only about herself in that case.

[Beautiful sky]

It just sounds like she was upset because her event didn't go as planned.

Yes, exactly

Maybe her annoyance wasn't about the people specifically, but the event itself. If there's something that pisses off LSE and LSI, I think it's when unpredictable things happen like that. And her emotions seem to be only about herself in that case.

Yes, she's hardly ever annoyed by the people, more about her event, her plans, things going according to her routine.

But how does this differ from ESE?

[Beautiful sky]

Stay, I'm again over demanding Te from you (trying to get you to tell me what actions are taking place and how)

I'm sorry...take your time and try to interpret later if that wears on you (I feel like I can be exhausting to my activity relations because of this constant need for that)

[stray]

Stay, I'm again over demanding Te from you (trying to get you to tell me what actions are taking place and how)

I'm sorry...take your time and try to interpret later if that wears on you (I feel like I can be exhausting to my activity relations because of this constant need for that)

Yeah, I'm not really into answering all of this.. I'll try though.

I'm sure an LSE would be better explaining how they differ from ESE. I think though that they would view events like this from an operational standpoint first. Even the people involved are parts of an operation. They might choreograph on how it all should run in their heads. It's a singular unit. If it breaks down, that's what pissing them off. Also, if someone didn't show up, they're not going to interpret it strictly from some relational point of view either. None of the "Since so and so did this, this is what our friendship means now.." They'll probably be friends, but just see that person as unreliable or a waste of time. The qualities they assign to them probably wouldn't be too personal.

[Beautiful sky]

Yeah, I'm not really into answering all of this.. I'll try though.

I'm sure an LSE would be better explaining how they differ from ESE. I think though that they would view events like this from an operational standpoint first. Even the people involved are parts of an operation. They might choreograph on how it all should run in their heads. It's a singular unit. If it breaks down, that's what pissing them off. Also, if someone didn't show up, they're not going to interpret it strictly from some relational point of view either. None of the "Since so and so did this, this is what our friendship means now.." They'll probably be friends, but just see that person as unreliable or a waste of time. The qualities they assign to them probably wouldn't be too personal.

Because of weaker Fe, the LSE is not inclined to just trust anyone; is this true of ESE's Fe? I thought Fe was involved in monitoring the behaviors/manners and honesty of others and because of this would be more inclined to pick and choose who they trust.

[Saberstorm]

I never thought your boyfriend was an LSE. By his look and his occupation, he is obviously a feeler. But absurd strongly advised me against confronting you over this. I remember he grabbed my arm and said "Let it go, let it go son, we do not need this fight!" and so I backed off making a thread about Maritas alleged LSE boyfriend. Perhaps next time, I will intrude!

[Beautiful sky]

Visually, they are extremely close and he's the first guy in a long time who's treated me GREAT. I should have known that LSE would not compare; but the differences came out when I suggested efficient ways of doing things and he didn't change them because he preferred doing thing the way that felt comfortable to him; this wasn't a major problem until his uncontrollable emotions interjected and where I ignored them rather than using logic and rationality to make him understand; his semi preference for doing things efficiently and for not evaluating the quality of things also started to lose my interest. He's the most Te of all ESE I've ever met and certainly his humor sustained my interest.

[Beautiful sky]

This should perhaps go to show all of you that I'm EII and no I'm not LII; and I don't want to be pestered about being an Alpha any more. And, Fi isn't to have parties and invite people over to host things with them to create relationships; there are anti social ESE and Fi doesn't do a damn thing for them.

[Pookie]

Tell a joke. If they laugh and don't get it, ESE.

[golden]

Visually, they are extremely close and he's the first guy in a long time who's treated me GREAT. I should have known that LSE would not compare; but the differences came out when I suggested efficient ways of doing things and he didn't change them because he preferred doing thing the way that felt comfortable to him; this wasn't a major problem until his uncontrollable emotions interjected and where I ignored them rather than using logic and rationality to make him understand; his semi preference for doing things efficiently and for not evaluating the quality of things also started to lose my interest. He's the most Te of all ESE I've ever met and certainly his humor sustained my interest.

A few thoughts:

* I am sincerely sorry that your relationship did not work out.

* It's annoying that you saw him as LSE while it was working and he evidently has to be un-LSEd if it did not work.

* You have been so rude and belittling and flat-out bizarre to so many people on this forum over claiming that you know their type via online interaction. And you are now saying you could not type LSE versus ESE in person day after day? Galling.

[Beautiful sky]

It's easier to ask tough probing questions on line because you don't have to love the person and show them affection while you do so.

And Confirmed, you don't have to make a festival of someone else's sadness. And, like I said, the similarities were extremely striking that only after a particular event did I note that something was not coming together correctly.

[Roro]

Because of weaker Fe, the LSE is not inclined to just trust anyone; is this true of ESE's Fe? I thought Fe was involved in monitoring the behaviors/manners and honesty of others and because of this would be more inclined to pick and choose who they trust.

You can't exactly use Socionics as an indication of a individuals levels of trust - too many variables to consider. Take into consideration personality disorders that interrupt a persons natural state of being.

he's the first guy in a long time who's treated me GREAT.

Your boyfriend? I beg to differ - at least from the couple of times I heard him speak to you on cam. No woman should really be spoken to in such a rude manner. You should have ended it a few months back when I first said something in Tinychat; the inevitable result was just prolonged.

[Ver]

I'm also sorry Martisa that your relationship didn't work out .
It doesn't really matter on that point if he's LSE or ESE in my opinion. It could well not work out if he was LSE. There are dual couples that split up. Yet, there are conflictors who stay together no matter what.
On side note, I've noticed some male ESFj come off ESTj-ish whereas the opposite goes for females. The reason of course is simple - man are not expected to show too much emotion.
I'm also worried that you put too much emphasis on socionics. Do you think you could be happy with somebody who isn't your dual? I believe it's extremely possible. There are many types we are compatible with. E.g. it I don't feel my duals are my soulmates. I feel more connected to people who share one trait with me, especially Fi - when we double it, it's like hmm we totally immerse each other into it. To me it's soulmating.

[thePirate]

Visually, they are extremely close and he's the first guy in a long time who's treated me GREAT. I should have known that LSE would not compare; but the differences came out when I suggested efficient ways of doing things and he didn't change them because he preferred doing thing the way that felt comfortable to him; this wasn't a major problem until his uncontrollable emotions interjected and where I ignored them rather than using logic and rationality to make him understand; his semi preference for doing things efficiently and for not evaluating the quality of things also started to lose my interest. He's the most Te of all ESE I've ever met and certainly his humor sustained my interest.

a very Te ESE?

It's amazing the rationalizations people come up with to negate the very simple fact that they suck at typing. Revise your conceptions of the types, I've been telling you this for awhile. There's no 'very Te ESE'.

[Nowisthetime]

a very Te ESE?

It's amazing the rationalizations people come up with to negate the very simple fact that they suck at typing. Revise your conceptions of the types, I've been telling you this for awhile. There's no 'very Te ESE'.

There are in fact "very Te ESEs" as any type can be "very Te" or "very X". That's why we need subtypes. It's a common mistyping to mix strong subtype with ego.

Anna Anka, Swedish ex wife of Paul Anka and television "star". She is a "very Te ESE" (Te-Dominant subtype)

She is a bit crazy, but fun to watch. English subtitles



Here you can also see her with her children:

[redbaron]

i would say both types can have good senses of humor, and be animated & smiley. this might be applicable to all Ej temperament types due to having extraverted dynamic elements - Fe (expression, motivation, emotional influence, etc.) & Te (beneficial action, activity, movement, etc.) - as their Base and Role functions.

my observations of these types IRL:

ESE: socially smooth like nobody's business - always know the right thing to say and how to respond to people. know a ton of people, easily connect and make friends. loud and will freely express their emotions (both positive & negative). dress fashionably and with taste. can be generous (e.g. buying drinks for the group at a bar) and thus end up spending too much money.

LSE: not as confident at expressing their real emotions (unlike ESE) so may do things like let their anger build up inside and eventually rage all at once. i often see male LSEs wearing a similar kind of outfit every single day that is basic, functional, & not terribly fashionable. typically cheap & don't like spending money.

both types may look like social butterflies but the difference is that socializing, having fun, and being around people is actually the ESE's goal, while the LSE's real reason for it is often because it's beneficial to their interests or their work or something.

oh god. you know what this means, if this is true. my husband is LSE. It's an idea I've been tossing around for awhile now. Not that it changes anything, or matters much. Not super surprising when all's said and done.

[redbaron]

I'm also sorry Martisa that your relationship didn't work out .

wait, I think they're back together?

[thePirate]

There are in fact "very Te ESEs" as any type can be "very Te" or "very X". That's why we need subtypes. It's a common mistyping to mix strong subtype with ego.

Anna Anka, Swedish ex wife of Paul Anka and television "star". She is a "very Te ESE" (Te-Dominant subtype)

She is a bit crazy, but fun to watch. English subtitles



Here you can also see her with her children:

Role function is subpar even when strengthened by subtype.

[blackburry]

wait, I think they're back together?

so he's LSE again?..




the swedish lady creeped me out. she is exactly the type of person i stay away from, she's essentially a bully. and though she may have a great body her face looks like a skeleton.

[Beautiful sky]

a very Te ESE?

It's amazing the rationalizations people come up with to negate the very simple fact that they suck at typing. Revise your conceptions of the types, I've been telling you this for awhile. There's no 'very Te ESE'.

Yes; there's no telling to what degree each of the functions are developed in an individual; I believe that I picked an ESE that was so developed in Te made him sound, look, act very much like an LSE; everything from humor, saying, mannerisms, to looks. It was surprising even to me. So the reason why I settled on ESE was because of typical orientation was more Fe than Te. This is where there was more Fe going on when there was supposed to be Te, that caused certain strains and frustrations on my part until I got to thinking "wait, what's going on here."

[Beautiful sky]

he doesn't, he gets long posts from a complaint generator that makes them for him.

you can tell by the level of intelligence displayed in those compared to his posts (which are barely understandable due to horrible use of the english language)

Yeah, because of my experience with ESE, up close and personal, I'm pretty convinced you may be ESE.

[wacey]

ESE's have Fi as their ignoring function. They value Ti. Think of Penny, a charcter from "The Big Bang Theory", a dramtazed ESE. She is slighty intrugued by Leonards Ti, as are most characters in that show. For example:
"Function 7 - observant, or ignoring, or restricting function, the function of personal knowledge. This is a strong (3D according to Ermak) but unconscious function. One generally has a good grasp of this function, but attempts to limit its use considerably. Individuals will disregard this function when an argument calls for restraint or when it will be difficult to indulge in its essence. At the same time one uses this function to restrict somebody's intervention to their privacy or territory, or other unsolicited interaction."

"ESEs are naturally interested in other people and relational connections; however, they may often tend to express their experience of these bonds with extravagant and colorful displays of affection and emotionality. They are often less concerned with focusing on the nature of the bond itself than on its outward expressions, and may take it for granted that emotions are reflected by one's expression; they may thus more commonly focus on the signals and body langage that others provide about their emotional receptiveness to the circumstance, as opposed to the content or context of the interaction. They often have a minimal understanding of introspective, subdued, internally-derived emotional states that are not observably expressed -- instead, they may tend to assume (wrongly) that everyone around them is driven to act as they are by highly potent and palpable emotional experiences, and that if individuals are reticent or standoffish, their emotions are merely hiding under the surface, waiting to be expressed (though they are sometimes inclined to attribute others' inaction to some manner of physical incapacity or discomfort instead). Do not people with strong Fi as a base do this very behavior often? In my experince of ESE's can be very confused when I do this...as if I am purposely trying to behave grouchy.

ESEs commonly have an all-inclusive attitude towards others that bears little room for ethically judgmental attitudes, or individually directed sentiments towards others. At times, they may be drawn into personal criticism; but more commonly they avoid ethical confrontations towards others and may seek to maintain a mood of harmony and happiness. They may become bored if the atmosphere around them becomes overly subdued, with frank discussions of others' character. A behavior LSE's participate in.

ESEs may often have an appreciation for the rules for interacting socially, and may criticize others who fail to follow accepted ettiquette and standards of politeness. They may see individuals who are more nonconformist and self-assertive, or who fail to follow established rules or environmental social norms, as necessarily mean and unfriendly -- they may operate with this type of collectivistic mindset, and may not be able to easily recognize or appreciate a more individuated and self-deterministic style of ethical values."

This may have the effect of making your ESFJ a little sensitive to those people he deems to be "mean".

[Beautiful sky]

He seemed to be LSE from speech:

"I approve."
"That works."

etc what gave off ESE is that LSE can make a lot of decisions and Matt was asking me to tell him what he should do in certain situations; that recalled the dual description of his duality and recalled that it was probably ESE more so than LSE

The Fi ignoring isn't so apparent because ESE appreciate good/honest/trustworthy people and can rationalize a lot about them away when they love them and want to take care of them.

[wacey]

He seemed to be LSE from speech:

"I approve."
"That works."

etc what gave off ESE is that LSE can make a lot of decisions and Matt was asking me to tell him what he should do in certain situations; that recalled the dual description of his duality and recalled that it was probably ESE more so than LSE

The Fi ignoring isn't so apparent because ESE appreciate good/honest/trustworthy people and can rationalize a lot about them away when they love them and want to take care of them.

Very true I have noticed this in close ESE's as well.

[Beautiful sky]

Honestly, I hate to say this, but ESE unlike LSE are not that concerned about TeSi; they focus more on the people in their vicinity, in reading their emtionality, whereas the LSE is more likely to focus on Te, thoughts, activity of objects in their environment, and LSE do more organizing work than an ESE. It was just a difference in shifting weight; more weight was shifted to Fe instead of Te, and because of that Ti become more involved, making it more uncomfortable for me to "handle the situation."

[The Ineffable]

There are in fact "very Te ESEs" as any type can be "very Te" or "very X". That's why we need subtypes. It's a common mistyping to mix strong subtype with ego.

Anna Anka, Swedish ex wife of Paul Anka and television "star". She is a "very Te ESE" (Te-Dominant subtype)

On planet Earth, she is just a clear-cut LSE. One of the most typical LSE celebrities I've ever seen - O'Reilly does not count, let's blame that on his religiousness and traditionalism .

[Nowisthetime]

On planet Earth, she is just a clear-cut LSE. One of the most typical LSE celebrities I've ever seen - O'Reilly does not count, let's blame that on his religiousness and traditionalism .

I have watched her a lot, she got famous through the series "Swedish Hollywood-wives. She is in fact 100% ESE. I think you would see it also if you understood Swedish. But I guess it is pointless to argue about her type now.

[The Ineffable]

I have watched her a lot, she got famous through the series "Swedish Hollywood-wives. She is in fact 100% ESE. I think you would see it also if you understood Swedish. But I guess it is pointless to argue about her type now.

I am bold enough to make the outrageous presumption that, when they translated her - sometimes she speaks plain English -, they haven't translated her Fe into Te, neither they edited her appearance and movements... Indeed it is pointless to argue about her type when we talk in terms of Model A, there exists no reason at all to type her Fe Ego. To be clear, I'm not talking about the "Dominant" Super-Id Blah-BLAh subtype system that you use, but of Socionics.

[silke]

I couldn't find any threads on differentiating these two types. From your experience what would you say are the most telling differences? I'm primarily looking for personal accounts and stories and nuances of character for this thread, not as much traits derived from pure theory. If you were to try to explain to someone who is completely new how to spot people of these types - how would you describe them?