Removing Myself from the EII Roster

[Cuddly McFluffles]

I really don't feel like this announcement warrants a whole thread in itself. However, I suspect there will be reactions, so I'm hoping to keep that out of other threads. Learning more about the quadras has given me reason to believe I may be ESI after all. I haven't definitively switched over yet (there are still some issues to iron out), but as shown by my signature, I'm strongly considering it. In the meantime, I am choosing to no longer type as EII. I'll still hang around the Lounge, though; I like being there.

[Azure Flame]

*throws vase across room and shouts unintelligible rage*

[willekeurig]

Noooooooooo. Be delta.

[Absurd]

Now this is damn alright, I just can't wait to see what happens next even though I know. Project Absurd is fully operational and can be launched any time.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

*throws vase across room and shouts unintelligible rage*

I didn't mean that kind of reaction.

*hands him a broom*

[glam]

since you made a thread - in what ways do you think Gamma > Delta for yourself?

[Cuddly McFluffles]

since you made a thread - in what ways do you think Gamma > Delta for yourself?

I'm heading to class soon, so I'll have to get on that this evening. To start out, though, I think some of the traits that led me to think Delta could just as easily be chalked up to learned helplessness as to anything socionic. I don't have a tendency to confront the world because the life has taught me that the world doesn't give a damn, that it'll only react irrationally, and that nothing will change; if I hate being disappointed, why set myself up for it? I want to be taken care of (to a degree) because I seriously doubt my own capacity to care for myself, be it health-wise or in a broader sense (like running my own life and supporting myself without screwing up and ending up on the streets). I used to want someone who would protect me from the world (which is part of why some people typed me IEI), but I eventually came to realize that I can't depend on someone else to compensate for my wounds. From there, I have realized that I will not be happy until I learn to confront the world and, through winning, realize that I am stronger than I think and that I can actually affect my circumstances. At the moment, I'm more interested in finding someone who will take care of what I cannot do, but who will also encourage me to do the things I can by reminding me that I am a capable person. There is definitely still a journey ahead. As far as what does (or could) relate to Socionics, I'll type that out when I have more time.

[Galen]

I'm heading to class soon, so I'll have to get on that this evening. To start out, though, I think some of the traits that led me to think Delta could just as easily be chalked up to learned helplessness as to anything socionic. I don't have a tendency to confront the world because the life has taught me that the world doesn't give a damn, that it'll only react irrationally, and that nothing will change; if I hate being disappointed, why set myself up for it? I want to be taken care of (to a degree) because I seriously doubt my own capacity to care for myself, be it health-wise or in a broader sense (like running my own life and supporting myself without screwing up and ending up on the streets). I used to want someone who would protect me from the world (which is part of why some people typed me IEI), but I eventually came to realize that I can't depend on someone else to compensate for my wounds. From there, I have realized that I will not be happy until I learn to confront the world and, through winning, realize that I am stronger than I think and that I can actually affect my circumstances. At the moment, I'm more interested in finding someone who will take care of what I cannot do, but who will also encourage me to do the things I can by reminding me that I am a capable person. There is definitely still a journey ahead. As far as what does (or could) relate to Socionics, I'll type that out when I have more time.

This whole thing sounds E6 as a mofo to me

[LeaT]

Nooo but perhaps it makes sense in the end. You seem a bit more practically bent and aggressive than I. I too considered ESI part because I had an absolutely amazing semi-dual relationship with ans LIE until he decided that our relationship was not worth the effort and I do think our differences were in the perceiving functions and how his Se often troubled me. but I am too vulnerable to Se. I don't hate violence as some descriptions suggest, but this mostly applies to fiction.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

This whole thing sounds E6 as a mofo to me

Yes, I'm also very E6.

[LeaT]

This whole thing sounds E6 as a mofo to me

CP 6 also I guess. By that logic though, if I would type myself based on my enneagram, LII or ILI would make more sense for me as well. Had to look long and hard into that one to see how I turned around to be the quadra I actually liked the least initially. I still don't like how the descriptions of delta focuses so much on production and work on sites such as wikisocion, but I now have a better understanding why it is this way. I suppose failure to also mention what production and work really means more than in a broader sense is also a weakness, since production and work is not just limited to the work-sphere.

Anyway, I would be careful to ascribe enneagram-related behavior to socionics. It just becomes confusing. I definitely think there can be overlap and that enneagram plays a vital role in helping us to find our sociotype, especially when it comes to more unlikely match-ups such as mine, but the motivations are entirely different and this is perhaps not always easy to recognize without long and hard personal introspection sessions. I for example read some description of a famous actor the other day, I think it was Marlon Brando, who was typed by the author as an LIE with absolute certainty to booth. However, what really struck me was how the description Marlon Brando didn't sound so LIE as much as it sounded sp 8 to me to the point it was eerily uncanny. Whether Marlon Brando is an sp 8 or not I do not know as I haven't looked into his type at all, but I thought it was one of those typical examples where two entirely different systems overlap nonetheless *snickers*

Of course, when it overlaps, it's rather easy to type yourself because it tends to strengthen the "stereotype" aspects of your character as to make it more recognizeable based off the type descriptions one reads on the internet and elsewhere as they too tend to be rather stereotype, but when the types are contrary it sure as hell becomes confusing at times. I know

[Galen]

CP 6 also I guess. By that logic though, if I would type myself based on my enneagram, LII or ILI would make more sense for me as well. Had to look long and hard into that one to see how I turned around to be the quadra I actually liked the least initially. I still don't like how the descriptions of delta focuses so much on production and work on sites such as wikisocion, but I now have a better understanding why it is this way. I suppose failure to also mention what production and work really means more than in a broader sense is also a weakness, since production and work is not just limited to the work-sphere.

Type descriptions are gay, I don't give them much thought outside of simple beginner-style introductions.

Anyway, I would be careful to ascribe enneagram-related behavior to socionics. It just becomes confusing.

I'm not ascribing it to socionics, rather I'm pointing out an alternate conclusions for what Ryene has said about herself. By doing so, I'm emphasizing that what she's said about her self-perceived capacity to take of herself etc.
is in and of itself less ascribable to socionics and more of an E6 trope.

I definitely think there can be overlap and that enneagram plays a vital role in helping us to find our sociotype, especially when it comes to more unlikely match-ups such as mine, but the motivations are entirely different and this is perhaps not always easy to recognize without long and hard personal introspection sessions.

You haven't been around for very long, so I don't anything about you or your types in any system. I'm still of the opinion though that as a rule, E5 and XXFx don't match.

I for example read some description of a famous actor the other day, I think it was Marlon Brando, who was typed by the author as an LIE with absolute certainty to booth. However, what really struck me was how the description Marlon Brando didn't sound so LIE as much as it sounded sp 8 to me to the point it was eerily uncanny. Whether Marlon Brando is an sp 8 or not I do not know as I haven't looked into his type at all, but I thought it was one of those typical examples where two entirely different systems overlap nonetheless *snickers*

Don't know much about Brando either, although I would have pegged him as 3 > 8 or some shit.

Of course, when it overlaps, it's rather easy to type yourself because it tends to strengthen the "stereotype" aspects of your character as to make it more recognizeable based off the type descriptions one reads on the internet and elsewhere as they too tend to be rather stereotype, but when the types are contrary it sure as hell becomes confusing at times. I know

The problem with this approach though is that if your understanding of either system is too steeped in such stereotypes then you've already defeated the purpose of learning about them in the first place. Whether you agree with them or not, both socionics and enneagram have much greater depth to them then simple behavioral stereotype descriptions.

[LeaT]

Type descriptions are gay, I don't give them much thought outside of simple beginner-style introductions.

The rest wasn't specifically a response to you but just me blabbering on in a more general manner.

I'm not ascribing it to socionics, rather I'm pointing out an alternate conclusions for what Ryene has said about herself. By doing so, I'm emphasizing that what she's said about her self-perceived capacity to take of herself etc.
is in and of itself less ascribable to socionics and more of an E6 trope.

Because I wasn't going to say you were doing it specifically, I was just directing it to Ryene being careful taking CP 6 traits of aggression as a must-be sign for an Se preference.

You haven't been around for very long, so I don't anything about you or your types in any system. I'm still of the opinion though that as a rule, E5 and XXFx don't match.

I haven't, but I see a lot of overlap in my enneagram behavior and Fi in socionics.

The problem with this approach though is that if your understanding of either system is too steeped in such stereotypes then you've already defeated the purpose of learning about them in the first place. Whether you agree with them or not, both socionics and enneagram have much greater depth to them then simple behavioral stereotype descriptions.

Of course, but what I mean is, when descriptions are not contrary, may it be functions or something else, it's easier to see how it applies to you.

[Galen]

The rest wasn't specifically a response to you but just me blabbering on in a more general manner.

Because I wasn't going to say you were doing it specifically, I was just directing it to Ryene being careful taking CP 6 traits of aggression as a must-be sign for an Se preference.

Ah, gotcha.

I haven't, but I see a lot of overlap in my enneagram behavior and Fi in socionics.

How's that?

[LeaT]

How's that?

I can for example see how being a withdrawn type ties into how Fi is hyper-aware of the social distance between yourself and other people for example.

[Park]

You're IEE-Fi. Which is why you're having these doubts.

[Absurd]

Yeah thought IEE and LII, I think. Anyway, don't know much besides that, didn't talk much, so hell, wants to reign in Gamma quadra, cool. I've been thinking about Gamma people making me honorary Gamma as well, they've got ******...

[Park]

You LIE.

[Galen]

I can for example see how being a withdrawn type ties into how Fi is hyper-aware of the social distance between yourself and other people for example.

Well 5s aren't the only withdrawn types in ennealore. 4s and 9s also count as withdrawn, and both of those seem much more applicable to EII or Fi in general.

[LeaT]

Well 5s aren't the only withdrawn types in ennealore. 4s and 9s also count as withdrawn, and both of those seem much more applicable to EII or Fi in general.

Yes, but I have a very strong 4-wing that makes me quite atypical even in 5-land. I do not for example identify as much with rejection as I do with frustration. Add a strong 4w5 fix and it's easy to see why I also seriously reconsidered being a 4w5.

[FoxOnStilts]

Yes, but I have a very strong 4-wing that makes me quite atypical even in 5-land. I do not for example identify as much with rejection as I do with frustration. Add a strong 4w5 fix and it's easy to see why I also seriously reconsidered being a 4w5.

A core motivating factor for 5s isn't rejection, but distrust of anything but oneself. This can include rejection, but when describing a five, I don't think rejection would be one of the first things I brought up because that seems to me like something that implies and focuses on people.

[Galen]

Yes, but I have a very strong 4-wing that makes me quite atypical even in 5-land. I do not for example identify as much with rejection as I do with frustration. Add a strong 4w5 fix and it's easy to see why I also seriously reconsidered being a 4w5.

Not to make undue accusations, but are you familiar with what rejection/attachment/frustration refer to? If you identify so much more with frustration > rejection, that would make 4 > 5 that much more likely.

[LeaT]

Not to make undue accusations, but are you familiar with what rejection/attachment/frustration refer to? If you identify so much more with frustration > rejection, that would make 4 > 5 that much more likely.

Think you misunderstand the term rejection in this context. Rejection is just the word to group up the rejection types e.g. 5, 8 and 3 is it? Frustration the frustration types 1, 4 and 6? That's what I was referring to. Rejection refers to the rejection of feelings. Frustration is about the only thing I identify with though when it comes to 4 aside the holy idea. My core motivations are however very 5-ish. I've already gone over the whole 4 vs 5 deal, no use spilling over cried milk. I may appear more as a 4w5 but 5 runs much better.

A core motivating factor for 5s isn't rejection, but distrust of anything but oneself. This can include rejection, but when describing a five, I don't think rejection would be one of the first things I brought up because that seems to me like something that implies and focuses on people.

See the above what I wrote about rejection.

I think socionics ethical 5s are no less impossible than MBTI feeler 5s that also exist. Just rarer.

[Absurd]

You LIE.

You Pinocchio.

[Galen]

Think you misunderstand the term rejection in this context. Rejection is just the word to group up the rejection types e.g. 5, 8 and 3 is it? Frustration the frustration types 1, 4 and 6? That's what I was referring to. Rejection refers to the rejection of feelings. Frustration is about the only thing I identify with though when it comes to 4 aside the holy idea. My core motivations are however very 5-ish. I've already gone over the whole 4 vs 5 deal, no use spilling over cried milk. I may appear more as a 4w5 but 5 runs much better.

Sounds like you need some lerningz

http://www.fitzel.ca/enneagram/ObjectRelns.html

Rejection, as it pertains to 2, 5, and 8 (not 3), doesn't really seem like an apt term for the phenomenon it's describing. I much prefer to think of rejection as "Overidentification," insomuch as it refers to a habitual overidentification of the ego with whatever center the type is in. As I see it, 2s will tend to attach their sense of self to their ability to project an image of being feelingful or connecting with others emotionally; 5s overidentify with their cognitive faculties and heavily rely on their capacity to be knowledgeable or solve problems; 8s place a majority of emphasis on their gut decision-making abilities and knowing what they want at any given moment. These types get most unhealthy when they reject all other aspects of their so-called selves in favor of these singular attributes.

Frustration types (1, 4, and 7, not 6) in my view seem like they could be better explained through the word Rejection, in that all three types will reject the aspects of self that the 2/5/8 triad identify with so much, and instead supplement some idealized image of how they should be. 1s reject their gut instinct faculties and instead place self-imposed standards for behavior and desire; 4s reject the notion of themselves as being overtly feelingful and instead turn that feeling inward to bolster some sense of personal authenticity; 7s will deny their need to work through their problems cognitively and keep that anxiety inside themselves in the hopes that the outside world will eventually take care of it. As one can imagine, Frustration types start disintegrating when they focus too much effort in this active denial of the self.

I think socionics ethical 5s are no less impossible than MBTI feeler 5s that also exist. Just rarer.

I have yet to see a single XXFx who I would also classify as E5, and MBTI is still gay so I don't bother to consider it.

[LeaT]

Sounds like you need some lerningz

http://www.fitzel.ca/enneagram/ObjectRelns.html

Rejection, as it pertains to 2, 5, and 8 (not 3), doesn't really seem like an apt term for the phenomenon it's describing. I much prefer to think of rejection as "Overidentification," insomuch as it refers to a habitual overidentification of the ego with whatever center the type is in. As I see it, 2s will tend to attach their sense of self to their ability to project an image of being feelingful or connecting with others emotionally; 5s overidentify with their cognitive faculties and heavily rely on their capacity to be knowledgeable or solve problems; 8s place a majority of emphasis on their gut decision-making abilities and knowing what they want at any given moment. These types get most unhealthy when they reject all other aspects of their so-called selves in favor of these singular attributes.

Frustration types (1, 4, and 7, not 6) in my view seem like they could be better explained through the word Rejection, in that all three types will reject the aspects of self that the 2/5/8 triad identify with so much, and instead supplement some idealized image of how they should be. 1s reject their gut instinct faculties and instead place self-imposed standards for behavior and desire; 4s reject the notion of themselves as being overtly feelingful and instead turn that feeling inward to bolster some sense of personal authenticity; 7s will deny their need to work through their problems cognitively and keep that anxiety inside themselves in the hopes that the outside world will eventually take care of it. As one can imagine, Frustration types start disintegrating when they focus too much effort in this active denial of the self.

Sure, I haven't looked that deeply into that portion of enneagram, no. I read some description of rejection and frustration the other day and frustration just clicked better.

I have yet to see a single XXFx who I would also classify as E5, and MBTI is still gay so I don't bother to consider it.

Shouldn't there be a first? I am open to considering a mistype of myself but I am fairly (like very) certain of being a delta type, and IJ temperament fits me the best so that really leaves very little room for something else. If you want to do that there's a thread for it though, although I think I prefer PM. Public typing of myself tends to cause a lot of anxiety, especially when I feel that my understanding of myself which I consider to be ultimate, does not coincide with how others perceive me and I feel this is because I am bad at conveying information about myself. It's not because I try to intentionally withhold information... it just becomes that way.

Regardless, I don't see how enneagram 5 alone when judging motivations must be contrary to socionics ethics. In ExI types Te is for example described as a thirst for information.

[Radio]

I just want to nitpick a bit.

In ExI types Te is for example described as a thirst for information.

sounds like feel-good babble, too nebulous to critically examine, too susceptible to goal-post moving. a lot of people (if not most) would identify positively with statements like these, regardless of type.

[LeaT]

I just want to nitpick a bit.



sounds like feel-good babble, too nebulous to critically examine, too susceptible to goal-post moving. a lot of people (if not most) would identify positively with statements like these, regardless of type.

Perhaps. I just cited what I read. I realize that it's not theoretically sound by any means.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

OK. This may be a somewhat weak case at the moment. As I mentioned, I'm leaning toward ESI, which means I'm still working out how it fits. I'm not going to worry as much about structuring this as carefully as I usually do, and I'm going to toss out whatever I feel might be relevant.

First of all, something of a confession. I'm not as "nice" as I present myself. I have focused quite a bit on being liked and have tailored my persona to that end. While I would not consider myself a "mean" person, I am judgmental, somewhat cold, and prone to verbally bitch-slapping people who piss me off. I have mostly refrained from the latter because I always felt I would have to apologize for my actions later, and I find apologizing to be absolutely humiliating. I refrain from confronting most people because, as mentioned, I learned that it wouldn't change anything and that it would only piss people off. I don't refrain from pushing people into things simply because I hate forcing them; I am aware that I do not have the power to force someone into anything. Same thing with ideas; you can't make anyone agree, and that's just as well.

At home, I am very confrontational and stubborn, willing to argue at length if I believe I'm right; I do it to my stepfather all the time, and I'd do it to my mother if I wasn't afraid of her (in my younger days, she got abusive when angry). I am capable of being more confrontational on the internet, perhaps because I feel less threatened behind a screen. I am capable of looking at alternate perspectives in a situation when I am not angry; the moment my emotions become involved, I lash out first and think later (unless we count thinking up a hostile reply). As I mentioned on another forum, I get so focused on pwning the person that I don't stop to think about whether what I'm doing is actually productive to reaching an understanding or whether I might have misunderstood something.

As most of you know, I've never been able to fully reconcile my very territorial and possessive nature with Se-PoLR, nor my focus on power dynamics (primarily in ensuring that no one gains power over me, be it through withholding info on my weaknesses or trying to grab some kind of dominance in an opposite-gender friendship). And yes, the latter is out of anxiety. Still, that strikes me as a fairly Se way of looking at it. I think my outlook on the world has been greatly influenced by my best friend in high school (the one who offered to beat up a guy who hurt me), and that he is the reason I see life in terms of war and struggle. I might be mistaken, but I don't think so; he often thought of himself as a warrior type, whereas I grew to lament my perceived lack of power in that area. And that's getting into some other stuff that I won't go into, because it's personal on both our parts. But.... yeah. Somewhere along the line, I have come to see life as a struggle, something you have to survive. Originally, I wanted someone to protect me because I didn't think I had the strength to do it myself. I used to rationalize myself as some kind of healer archetype, the type who nurtured emotions from the back line and essentially gave the warrior a reason to go out and fight and a reason to come back home, but... I don't want that. It feels so freaking useless. Is that really all I have to contribute as a person? And yes, I tie usefulness with purpose, and purpose with having a reason to exist in this world. Anyway, I now I prefer the idea of being supported while I confront the world so that I can gain confidence in my own power and ability, and being fought for when I really can't handle the situation.

I also may feel inclined toward a person based on their usefulness/helpfulness. In fact, I retained the relationship with my stepfather, even after he seriously pissed me off and I felt no bond there anymore, because I didn't want to eliminate him as a source of aid should I need it later. On perhaps a similar note, I find material security to be a must should I ever marry; I don't need 100K and a big house, but I do expect him to have a stable job and a decent place. No starving artists here, thank you (I actually chose not to pursue things with a man because he was an aspiring full-time musician). I do enjoy status and prestige, even being thought of as better or superior. I can get a bit catty with it sometimes, which I really hate in myself.

And now for something that is perhaps a bit more blatantly on-theory. I've heard various EIIs talk about how they're more forgiving of people who offend; IIRC, they tend to kind of overlook and move on, or they choose to forgive. Never been that way that I can recall. What I didn't realize is that this is a product of the interaction between Fi and Ne. Fi + Ne focuses on the potential within people, so Delta NFs tend to focus on the good that is in people or that could develop within someone if given the chance. I'm not that forgiving. Offend me sufficiently, and you're a bastard, and good luck changing my mind on that; do it enough times, and you get written off. I mentioned elsewhere how I'll easily label someone an idiot, a bitch, etc if they really get on my nerves. (Sadly, PerC does not allow for those kind of attacks.) Apparently, this is more in line with Fi+Se values. Also, it was mentioned that the "protection" I've been looking for, something that led me to be typed as IEI forever ago, would make just as much sense if I was looking for an LIE as it would if I was looking for an SLE.

There's probably more I could mention, but I'll leave this here for now and answer comments later. Sorry about the mess.

[Minde]

Hm, I feel like saying something, but I'm not sure what. I'm fairly sure you belong to the Fi world, but I don't actually care what you type yourself. If ESI feels like it fits better and if using that lens helps with seeing and interacting with the world better, go for it.

I think you're pretty cool anyway, even if you don't consider yourself the nicest person.



Just thought of something, though - I wonder if near strong stamina for arguing, particularly forcibly (not nec. loudly, but, um, strongly?), where victory is the goal, is Se-ish. I personally have been known to be rather unyielding in my positions and able to keep up a discussion for a fairly long time, but there are certain styles of discussions/arguments that make me very uncomfortable and I'm more likely to break it off ("Fine, you think what you think and I'll think what I think and we'll try to coexist peaceably") than keep on going, particularly if things get heated.. One of my brothers, who I believe might be ISTj, does that style of arguing, where he'll get persistently belligerent. My mother, who I believe is ESTj, doesn't like it but can keep up with him far longer than I can tolerate. My father, who I believe is Delta NF, is better at diffusing but he'll also just walk away if he feels a discussion is not going anywhere.

(Obviously a single behavior doesn't mean anything in and of itself, but patterns of behavior can be informative.)

[Beautiful sky]

I've never been able to fully reconcile my very territorial and possessive nature with Se-PoLR, nor my focus on power dynamics (primarily in ensuring that no one gains power over me, be it through withholding info on my weaknesses or trying to grab some kind of dominance in an opposite-gender friendship).

OH GOD.

[LeaT]

I comment because I kind of know where you are coming from and going with this.

First of all, something of a confession. I'm not as "nice" as I present myself. I have focused quite a bit on being liked and have tailored my persona to that end. While I would not consider myself a "mean" person, I am judgmental, somewhat cold, and prone to verbally bitch-slapping people who piss me off. I have mostly refrained from the latter because I always felt I would have to apologize for my actions later, and I find apologizing to be absolutely humiliating. I refrain from confronting most people because, as mentioned, I learned that it wouldn't change anything and that it would only piss people off. I don't refrain from pushing people into things simply because I hate forcing them; I am aware that I do not have the power to force someone into anything. Same thing with ideas; you can't make anyone agree, and that's just as well.

But does it mean others cannot perceive you as nice? I don't think of myself as a nice or a warm or cuddly type of person either really, but apparently this is perhaps how people who know me well seem to perceive me, regardless.

At home, I am very confrontational and stubborn, willing to argue at length if I believe I'm right; I do it to my stepfather all the time, and I'd do it to my mother if I wasn't afraid of her (in my younger days, she got abusive when angry).

Can't relate. Being able to find the power to truly stand up against and overpower my stepmother and win the argument and thus end all conflict henceforth was one of my strongest desires as a child. I still struggle with this IRL. I also have a hard time saying no to people. Ironically, IRL I am a bit more of a doormat than how I come off on the internet even though I try not to be and I hate myself for it.

I am capable of being more confrontational on the internet, perhaps because I feel less threatened behind a screen.

I think it applies to everyone.

I am capable of looking at alternate perspectives in a situation when I am not angry; the moment my emotions become involved, I lash out first and think later (unless we count thinking up a hostile reply). As I mentioned on another forum, I get so focused on pwning the person that I don't stop to think about whether what I'm doing is actually productive to reaching an understanding or whether I might have misunderstood something.

Sounds vaguely enneagram 8-ish. I relate, although for me it's more of a struggle to actually be able to lash out. I desire to, but I do not. I can be like this, and I can also try to reach for a common ground with misunderstandings. Highly depends on the people involved. I tend to be less concerned about finding a common ground the more the person slips on my dislike meter.

As most of you know, I've never been able to fully reconcile my very territorial and possessive nature with Se-PoLR, nor my focus on power dynamics (primarily in ensuring that no one gains power over me, be it through withholding info on my weaknesses or trying to grab some kind of dominance in an opposite-gender friendship).

Sounds very enneagram 8 to me. I can kind of relate because the lack of aggression in the LII description when I first typed myself as such bothered me a little. They sounded like complete doormats. I think there's a varying range here though, where some will be less doormat-y than others. The user bearotter on PersC comes to mind who is actually 8w9. I too considered ESI by the way for my type, but the truth is that I'm much too aristocratic to be one, and I have been reviewing my overall thinking and outlook for some time now and I am also a positivist deep down. I tend to try to look for positive outcomes rather than negative. It was a bit surprising to me because I tend to see myself as more negative.

And yes, the latter is out of anxiety. Still, that strikes me as a fairly Se way of looking at it. I think my outlook on the world has been greatly influenced by my best friend in high school (the one who offered to beat up a guy who hurt me), and that he is the reason I see life in terms of war and struggle. I might be mistaken, but I don't think so; he often thought of himself as a warrior type, whereas I grew to lament my perceived lack of power in that area. And that's getting into some other stuff that I won't go into, because it's personal on both our parts. But.... yeah. Somewhere along the line, I have come to see life as a struggle, something you have to survive.

Again, strikes me as very 8-ish with a touch of CP 6. I can relate but not that strongly. I'm more likely to think like this when you piss me off and do so thoroughly. Could as well be explained by superego behavior.

Originally, I wanted someone to protect me because I didn't think I had the strength to do it myself. I used to rationalize myself as some kind of healer archetype, the type who nurtured emotions from the back line and essentially gave the warrior a reason to go out and fight and a reason to come back home, but... I don't want that. It feels so freaking useless. Is that really all I have to contribute as a person? And yes, I tie usefulness with purpose, and purpose with having a reason to exist in this world. Anyway, I now I prefer the idea of being supported while I confront the world so that I can gain confidence in my own power and ability, and being fought for when I really can't handle the situation.

So you rather engage at the frontline, then? I never identified much with the healer archetype either for the matter. It felt largely powerless, but I don't identify myself as a warrior either. I see myself more of a ranged fighter, a back-up. I would like to see other EIIs and to a degree, IEEs comment on what they think about this.

I also may feel inclined toward a person based on their usefulness/helpfulness. In fact, I retained the relationship with my stepfather, even after he seriously pissed me off and I felt no bond there anymore, because I didn't want to eliminate him as a source of aid should I need it later. On perhaps a similar note, I find material security to be a must should I ever marry; I don't need 100K and a big house, but I do expect him to have a stable job and a decent place. No starving artists here, thank you (I actually chose not to pursue things with a man because he was an aspiring full-time musician). I do enjoy status and prestige, even being thought of as better or superior. I can get a bit catty with it sometimes, which I really hate in myself.

That I can't relate to at all. If I thought the artist was the right man, I'd marry him in a heartbeat and I've done such decisions before, meeting and engaging men in what other people would find to be somewhat fishy situations because I rather stick with what I feel over rationalizing the logical validity of it all, for example meeting men I've met over the internet and inviting them into my home if I feel for them strongly enough. Those things don't really concern me. If I feel something, I'll stick with it. Materialism is not something I am largely concerned about either. I identify it as being one of my weak spots, in fact. I have a hard time looking for a job, I have a hard time performing a job, and I definitely relate to Si in the sense that I'm very poor at taking care of myself.

And now for something that is perhaps a bit more blatantly on-theory. I've heard various EIIs talk about how they're more forgiving of people who offend; IIRC, they tend to kind of overlook and move on, or they choose to forgive. Never been that way that I can recall. What I didn't realize is that this is a product of the interaction between Fi and Ne. Fi + Ne focuses on the potential within people, so Delta NFs tend to focus on the good that is in people or that could develop within someone if given the chance. I'm not that forgiving. Offend me sufficiently, and you're a bastard, and good luck changing my mind on that; do it enough times, and you get written off. I mentioned elsewhere how I'll easily label someone an idiot, a bitch, etc if they really get on my nerves. (Sadly, PerC does not allow for those kind of attacks.) Apparently, this is more in line with Fi+Se values. Also, it was mentioned that the "protection" I've been looking for, something that led me to be typed as IEI forever ago, would make just as much sense if I was looking for an LIE as it would if I was looking for an SLE.

I can relate but those people are really depisable then and I find no redeemable quality about them. It can change though, if they do something that would redeem them in my eyes, but at the same time, I also have a hard time finding myself to truly hate another person. Even if I am truly and genuinely repulsed and I can be rather bitchy behind their back like talking bullshit and so on, I still do not hate. There's always somewhere that little voice in me that says, "well, if you look at it from their point of view they're not bad people". If that's what is meant by the EII being easy to forgive, then yes. Furthermore, I am very likely to think and feel that way about most people. I was once telling other people on another forum that I can emphathize with a rapist if I must, that I can see the worth of their life. Rapist or not, they got people who they love and people who love them back. They are still human. What they did is absolutely abhorrent and depicable but it doesn't mean I hate them. I met strong opposition and aggressive outbursts in return. They clearly didn't believe me or saw the value of such thoughts. Yet if I have to pick one of my defining traits, I don't think aggression scores as highly as my ability to empathize does. Deep down, much of my life and my ethics are driven from a need to understand other people, and especially those that others tend to express hate towards. I see it as rather simple-minded to just join the horde and hate because everyone else hates. People don't need hate, they need love and understanding.

Strangely enough though, I do not believe as much in mercy as I believe in justice.

There's probably more I could mention, but I'll leave this here for now and answer comments later. Sorry about the mess.

What do you think of the above? Perhaps it could help you iron out some things. I am fairly sure about being Ne creative.

[Korpsy Knievel]

The distinction between EII and ESI is identical to that between gnomes and hobbits. Everything else is superfluous.

[Galen]

I haven't had much extended interaction with you to determine EII or ESI, but most everything you've said about power struggles, self-perceived weaknesses, wanting to feel protected etc. sounds much more attributable to an E6 mindset with a big reactivity fix (648/649 tritype or thereabout) than anything in I can figure in Socionics. You sound like you've had to deal with a lot of bullshit and there's still residual scar tissue left over that has to be addressed.

I think the easiest thing you can do right now to figure out if you're Se-valuing is start a tumblr page and see how many pictures of full-body scars and severed penises pop up. If that doesn't work, take a look at cognitive styles and see what pops up.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

I haven't had much extended interaction with you to determine EII or ESI, but most everything you've said about power struggles, self-perceived weaknesses, wanting to feel protected etc. sounds much more attributable to an E6 mindset with a big reactivity fix (648/649 tritype or thereabout) than anything in I can figure in Socionics. You sound like you've had to deal with a lot of bullshit and there's still residual scar tissue left over that has to be addressed.

I'm leaning toward 631 or 639 for the moment, for reasons I am currently too tired to formulate. I had originally considered 648 or 649, though.

I think the easiest thing you can do right now to figure out if you're Se-valuing is start a tumblr page and see how many pictures of full-body scars and severed penises pop up. If that doesn't work, take a look at cognitive styles and see what pops up.

Are you talking about Gulenko's cognitive styles?

[Galen]

Are you talking about Gulenko's cognitive styles?

Exactamundo. Have you looked at holographic vs causal-determinist at all?

[willekeurig]

I don't know what your type is, but here are some thoughts from and EII perspective.

While I would not consider myself a "mean" person, I am judgmental, somewhat cold, and prone to verbally bitch-slapping people who piss me off.

At home, I am very confrontational and stubborn, willing to argue at length if I believe I'm right;

I can relate to these and I'm the subtype of EII that's supposed to suck even more at Se than the rest. Having Se as polr doesn't necessarily make one a timid pushover, though that may happen. At least with me, the overuse of the function is actually quite typical. I may act too confrontationally/aggressively if someone's trying to compel me, especially with people I know well already, such as family members. With strangers I'm more prone to withdrawal.

As most of you know, I've never been able to fully reconcile my very territorial and possessive nature with Se-PoLR, nor my focus on power dynamics (primarily in ensuring that no one gains power over me, be it through withholding info on my weaknesses or trying to grab some kind of dominance in an opposite-gender friendship).

Funny, I've always sort of blamed my Se polr for my territorial and possessive nature. I'm also neurotic about the idea of someone having power over me, and you could say I have a principle to never let anyone dominate me, even over the smallest things. If someone orders me to e.g. get the trash out right away I probably won't because I'm afraid they'll think they can control me.The ESIs I know seem to be much more laid back about these things; if the issue is not important they don't really mind bossed around. I've thought this could be due to them feeling confident about defending themselves when the situation is different.

But yeah, maybe this is more related to the Sp-instinct than Se.

And now for something that is perhaps a bit more blatantly on-theory. I've heard various EIIs talk about how they're more forgiving of people who offend; IIRC, they tend to kind of overlook and move on, or they choose to forgive. Never been that way that I can recall. What I didn't realize is that this is a product of the interaction between Fi and Ne. Fi + Ne focuses on the potential within people, so Delta NFs tend to focus on the good that is in people or that could develop within someone if given the chance. I'm not that forgiving. Offend me sufficiently, and you're a bastard, and good luck changing my mind on that; do it enough times, and you get written off. I mentioned elsewhere how I'll easily label someone an idiot, a bitch, etc if they really get on my nerves. (Sadly, PerC does not allow for those kind of attacks.) Apparently, this is more in line with Fi+Se values.

I've noticed this too. ESIs seem to be quicker to judge people and more inclined to hold grudges compared to EIIs. I'm forever understanding and willing to talk things over, sometimes maybe too much so, and it makes it difficult to leave people that as a bad influence behind sometimes. I think Fi-EIIs are closer to ESIs on this matter.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

I can relate to these and I'm the subtype of EII that's supposed to suck even more at Se than the rest. Having Se as polr doesn't necessarily make one a timid pushover, though that may happen. At least with me, the overuse of the function is actually quite typical. I may act too confrontationally/aggressively if someone's trying to compel me, especially with people I know well already, such as family members. With strangers I'm more prone to withdrawal.

I think it probably doesn't help that I was raised under controlling parents; this has probably made me particularly hypersensitive.

Funny, I've always sort of blamed my Se polr for my territorial and possessive nature. I'm also neurotic about the idea of someone having power over me, and you could say I have a principle to never let anyone dominate me, even over the smallest things. If someone orders me to e.g. get the trash out right away I probably won't because I'm afraid they'll think they can control me.The ESIs I know seem to be much more laid back about these things; if the issue is not important they don't really mind bossed around. I've thought this could be due to them feeling confident about defending themselves when the situation is different.

That's a fair idea to consider. Though in my case, I resist being controlled but am happy to steer others.

But yeah, maybe this is more related to the Sp-instinct than Se.

The instincts are... weird to me, mostly because I have difficulty identifying primarily with any of them. I would have thought myself SP, but I am not proactive in taking care of myself and have long held a fear that I couldn't if I tried; this sounds more SP-last, in some ways. Likewise, I'm not the risk-taking, "balls to the wall" (to quote an old friend) sort implied by SX-primary, but I gravitate toward energetic and intense connections with the few people I feel really "get" me. And I don't entirely understand SO.

I've noticed this too. ESIs seem to be quicker to judge people and more inclined to hold grudges compared to EIIs. I'm forever understanding and willing to talk things over, sometimes maybe too much so, and it makes it difficult to leave people that as a bad influence behind sometimes. I think Fi-EIIs are closer to ESIs on this matter.

I think Fi-sub was a common typing for me.