Se and aggression
some people talk like the crux of se is aggression.
some people say its not related at all.
most people seem to have some kind of "no, but..." in between sort of opinion.
whats your take?
i know this is something thats been discussed five billion times already but it can be nice to have opinions all in one place. feel free to link to stuff you've written elsewhere.
It depends on the position in Model A. It's also very easy to confuse the two 'perceiving' functions as they have the same kind of 'outgoing' behaviours.
Having Se in Lead - 1 versus having Se in PoLR - 4 has clear implications.Originally Posted by lungs
Se has a lot of outgoing energy - QUOTE:When this element is in the leading position, the individual possesses exceptional personal force/will. He is a born organizer of anything. This can appear very aggressive. By contrast Ne also has a lot of outgoing psychic energy - QUOTE:"Energizes" others with his understanding of the potential energy of surrounding objects. Can also seem very aggressive by motivating others to hold to his position; idea organising if you will.
Hard to say.. I don't think most of them intend to come off like that, but since they're so good at knowing what buttons to push to get what they want, people that are less good at it may find it uncomfortable. The same can of course happen with any function - someone with weak Ti easily finds the company of a LII uncomfortable etc. Maybe Se people get labeled as aggressive more easily than others simply because Se is both extroverted and strongly associated with the physical world. It's hard to imagine Ni being described as aggressive, though the use of it can certainly cause discomfort in people that are weak at it. I personally tend to find strong Se-doms a bit too confrontational, but it's my polr so I guess that's how I'm "supposed" to react to them.
One somewhat-related case came into my mind. We we're having a pre-christmas party with my classmates a few weeks ago, and started playing a drinking game called "who of us". The idea is that someone makes up a question that begins with "who of us" (e.g. "who of us is the most likely to drop off"), everyone points at the person that comes to their mind, and you need to take as many sips as there are fingers pointing at you. There's one Se-SEE girl in my class (assuming I've typed everyone right she's the only Se-dom). She came up with a question "Who of us is the most aggressive?", and every single finger (except for hers) pointed at her. She was clearly extremely surprised and got really self-conscious about it for a while. She kept on asking people whether they really found her aggressive and should she change her behaviour a long while after.
I've been called aggressive by some people that found me aggressive which is funny, and I'm not Se ego at all, so it boils down to what people want to see, certain people/types?
They say that aggression is related to Se, not that the crux of Se is aggression in itself - just a facet of it.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I do make a connection like this, but a better term to describe it would be "dominant behavior". This also includes non-hostile actions (whereas "aggression" has a more negative connotation). SLI have Se as their ignoring function and I think this is the right place in my case. I don't like power plays and I don't actively seek confrontations. But if people push for conflict, I usually don't simply back off. I'm especially sensitive to arbitrary displays of dominant behavior and I'm prone to act especially uncooperative if I feel that people abuse their position or power. Also, the social competition (earn tons of money, have a succesful career, be famous, ect.) means little to me except if it coincidences with my individual goals.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Same, there is a treshold to it, I can endure much, really, but if it is prolonged and lasting, I'm not going to take it. And if that's me "displaying" aggressive behaviour, well, think twice people.
It isnt about aggression, but it is about force of will. Either the Se type is resilient, like a wall of will (toward self), or expanding (from self). Sometimes the former is mistaken as an introvert. However, the pattern is identical of force of will. Someone like me works in the opposing way, which is that my will is only strongly expressed when prssed against. -- defensive. This is where the notion of aggressive types come from. It is not inherently negative, but it can be a negative or positive aspet, depending on another. When someone else's will is being intruded on, however, then they have been aggressed.
Is is extremely related, but poorly translated, since force of will can take many forms, especially since its an extroverted function -- a smirk, an implicated should or an indirect logical implication, and suddenly the other person has given up an inch of their will.
An ISFj, however, is less interested in expanding their will on others outward, but more interested in expanding their will on their intimate relations and those that could be harmful to said relations.
I like this thread.
I like it a lot.
"Second Function: Volitional SensingThe ability to vigorously defend their rights and interests. The continuous, enduring drive to convince others to abide by the principles of morality. Persistent and uncompromising struggle against the evils in life. Demanding expectations for themselves and others. Successful resistance of volitional pressure. Readiness to aggressively protect what is theirs; purposefulness, stubborness, obstinacy."
If I wanted to press my will toward you, you'd resist or I would give up because it would require too much consistent force on my behalf that I would consider a waste of my energy. Another person, however, may not. In a personal relation, the mate of someone like this may attempt to enforce their will "for them or for what is better, etc" and never get anywhere, thus left resentful that they were not accepted in this fashion, which is a tell-tail sign that this relation will either fail or incur the same repeating problem indefinitely.
I cant summon an undead russian lady, so this is as good a starting point as any, which is why I tried to detail something more personable about Se in ISFj, which is what I assumed Kassi ewas curious about.
I think overt aggression is related to Extroverted Rationality and Extroverted Sensation. Every individual with 4D(dimensional )also has 4D extraverted rationality.
So the ESXx group is the most aggressive out of all the types.
These are all farsighted vs carefree types as well.
It's aggrandizing because it makes it seem as if that behavior always ends up with getting what you want, whereas we live in a free society, so it's as likely to fail as any other approach.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
An Ij-Ne is more likely to show stubborness in repeating the same perceptive states -- much like looking at a crystal from many angles, and shining light through the new angle, the same patterns of questions/answers will emerge on the same subject. That is how Ne manifests, especially when focused under the pressure of Ti or Fi dominants.
Correct, thats part of our fallacy of seeing theory as the whole or a type as the whole, without seeing it as just a process of a part.
I like going to primary sources on such subjects. Below is Herzy's (SLE) description of Se. She doesn't mention of aggression of any kind but describes Se as a mode of perception, a kind of a radar that registers everything that's going on around her and directs her attention to various external stimuli. With Se being external statics of objects, it registers these stimuli as locked within their physical parameters (so there are none of these mutations and permutations like it happens with Ne).
She mentions that sometimes with Se she wants to move or modify some object. This is something I've noticed about other SLEs as well - they will readily move, shove, or transpose the objects and people around them. If there is nothing that needs this kind of treatment, they come up with something, which I noticed can be a nuisance to the Ne-egos. They see this as some kind of unnecessary disturbance and perhaps interpret this as a form of aggression. In the post below DJA (beta ST) is describing this same kind of drive as Herzy, to move and push objects around, to which FoxOnStilts (ILE) reacts rather negatively (link):I think what you guys are doing is leaping directly from the idea of the function itself to the actions that sometimes occur as a result. However, what you guys don't seem to realize is thattinge to it).
At rest, you're kind of in an observatory state of mind. Everything around you gets registered, no matter if you can touch it, or it's way off in the distant distance. You're subconsciously registering everything that enters your "radar". If everything's good, your sonar stays at a constant rate. Sometimes, particular things will enter your radar that will cause the mental sonar to start beeping a little more rapidly, a little louder, or at an irregular rhythm. When this happens, attention immediately gets directed towards the cause. It may be the presence of a person or thing, the absence of it, or something that's registering as "abnormal". When this happens, the proper action to be taken as a result of it is determined. (After this happens, the action is usually tweaked or outright changed by whatever Ji function you have better control with.) A few examples:
I'm up in my room, writing this post, and a scratching noise enters into my radar. Immediately, my attention gets diverted from writing this sentence, and I focus solely on the "disturbance". At first, it sounds as if my parents are quietly whispering downstairs. At this point, my
Another scenario is that tomorrow is the first day of school, and I'm going in a bit early. Most likely, no one will be there yet, but my
Then of course, certain things will enter the radar (or be absent from the radar) that the
Edit: And I'd also like to add that sometimes in the absence of any activity, beeps in the radar are actively pursued by the
I know this might sound awfully simplistic, but before you all go, "Nuh nuh,
On the topic of whether any of Jung's dichotomies can be linked to aggression, there has been research done for MBTI types to show that T-F is the only dichotomy that shows moderate correlation to Agreeableness score on Big 5 with F-types scoring higher on this parameter and T-types getting lower scores. Low Agreeableness scores have been linked to aggressive attitudes and behaviors, so from this is can be inferred that it's T & F elements that have something to do with 'aggresivity' and not the sensing ones. I haven't run across any studies of this kind done for socionics types as of yet, but if I do happen to find one I'll post it up.
Enneagram type also modulates Agreeableness with types 3, 5, and 8 scoring the lowest on Agreeableness so can be expected to be more aggressive on avearge than other types. I've posted this up before, here it is again:
Big 5 shows that Se and aggression are not related, which is what you mentioned in the op. Do you even read what you post?
Because I don't tell lungs what she wants to hear, so then she throws hissy fits and passively-aggressively talks shit behind my back.
Re: the topic at hand, studies, that have been done in MBTI at least, show that there is no relationship between Se and aggressive attitudes so it's likely that this correlation that socionics makes doesn't work.
This forum is like a one big déjà vu.
aww shit
that's right
I think aggression might be too loaded a word. It's rather biased, probably assertiveness is a better thing to discuss as far as sociotype.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assertiveness
well tbh there are two of me
Aggressiveness is too loaded a word, it's very different what many individuals will view as aggression.are you saying assertiveness is related, or just that aggressiveness is too loaded a word?
assertiveness seems like too broadly human. but then i think everybody can cook with practice
Also imo a lot of aggression is involved with pre-cortex structures underlying information processing. While assertiveness is conscious cognitive process, which are more likely to be information processing related.
It was going so well too, I realised that 'elaborate' isn't an attempt by lungs to demean me, but actually one to encourage further discussion in a topic to her interest, something I find difficult when I'm not really ready to work all of it out yet.
I shall reserve 'I don't really know yet' to indicate I haven't landed on anything resembling an appropriate response.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
