William's type - ILE

[Creepy-theticalanti]

.

[Reficulris]

Hi William,

Well, for whatever it's worth @truck thinks we're identybro's cuz we're both cheery

You vibe similar but a bit different from me though. Could be subtype, could be that i'm not actually ile or could be that you're not. Or that i don't know you good enough yet to judge, who knows.

I don't know any male ESE's so i can't really compare you.

So, yeah, lets take my previous silence as agreement, I don't have any problems with you as identical.

Ref

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

There's a new co-worker of mine who I think is ESE, and we hit it off extremely well. I was thinking of starting a thread saying how Identity Relations are enormously underrated and surprisingly refreshing. I know they're typically ranked 2nd only to Duality. It seems like you can explore and learn yourself through another person, and it's comfortable seeing trends in their life that you could use to learn how you personally should best grow.

Yes I'm glad you brought this up. Socionics is very heteronormative. It makes sense tho, it's how most people think 'opposites attract', which creates energy and spark/life for most people. However not everybody learns this way. It's very arrogant and presumptuous for anybody to assume that all of humanity fits in this model. It's a lot like assuming everybody has a right-handed orientation just because most people do. I am very in your face gay and annoyingly gay, and ALWAYS WILL BE - with no apologizes, to combat socionics heteronormativity.

Fi-PoLR explains a lot for me. I often don't realize/consider how other people think or feel. That would explain a lot of my posts on this forum, especially during some of the earlier years, when I would piss people off, quite often unintentionally. Maintaining relationship distance seems like a chore to me.

I'm glad you're man enough to admit this, but to be fair you often did gaslight/troll and fuck with other people's emotions. It was very intentional. It's more like, it was unintentional when you felt guilty for going too far, but during your wrath you were often in pure troll mode and you know it. It's no big deal tho, it's easy to bully people online because they can't really physically retaliate you and put you in your place. I can understand that. And I think you made some improvements in this area.

The only reason why I turned into a 'nice guy' is the real world beat me up too much. It usually takes somebody being truly shit on before they understand the value of empathy and compassion. Otherwise you're just sort of this spoiled arrogant brat, always wondering what everybody else's problem is, why they can't be as self-confident as you. My sister has had the same problem and finally felt the feces fly on her face - and it has humbled her. I think people either go through that process or they don't.

[ashlesha]

william, Ne and Ti fit perfectly in your superid, in my opinion.

[yeves]

@William you had your type as LSE, then changed it to ESE, then changed it back to LSE, and you were also considering ILE? what's the deal?

[some chair]

The fence is the best vantage point for determining when the people duking it out in the field have missed something.

Pyrrhonism 4 lyfe. Maybe.

[Ron Mexico]

Cool. That was one of the types first suggested when I joined in 2010. I remember even Ashton thought I VI'd as LII before changing his mind to ESE.

As a fun thought, if Woof is now ESE and I'm LII, then I get to be duals with woofy! YES.

No. You dont have a socionics type.

[xerx]

5. The notoriety of ILEs taking shortcuts could explain occasional dishonesty.

Yeah... that's actually not type related.

[xerx]

Your face is not type related.

Of course it's not, cuz VI is a crock : )

Anyway, I would beg to differ. I agree every type tries to make things simpler, and look for 'shortcuts'. But perhaps ILE's tendency to see things in systems allows them to save time more efficiently than another type.

If the bolded describes anything, it's the classical socionics Te stereotype.

But "taking shortcuts" could mean anything as used without additional qualifiers. It could mean finishing the work in the least amount of time, or it could mean finishing only the important bits, or it could mean finishing a lower-quality version quickly, etc. That's a problem for socionics tests & type descriptions in general, so don't think I'm putting you on the spot.

[The Ineffable]

5. The notoriety of ILEs taking shortcuts could explain occasional dishonesty.

Give us an example. I could think of negligence or inventivity, but dishonesty?...

[Eliza Thomason]

Edit: next 8 posts moved from http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Profiles-Ever

Omigosh, these are funny. In its cartoonish way I do see myself IEE, even though I am rarely, if ever, a chatterbox in person (but in writing, yes - so, it fits that way). And the other types sound right, too, for those that I know..

Hi, @William! I am wondering, how well do you relate to the ENTp description? Does it sound like an accurate "cartoon" of you? I am noting these things, especially:

Incredibly touchy individuals, prone to social phobia. Live in an impenetrable mess, dress in tattered clothing. Always bump into corners and fall into open manholes. ...

And also because they seem unbelievably clever, as they say a lot of unintelligible words, the total essence of which is unclear and mysterious....

their aggressive propaganda of torn clothing, sandwiches, and low-paid quasi-scientific work as the only acceptable ways of life.

...Dons in the forums usually breed endless pseudo-scientific debates around socionics, dully theorize at every opportune and inopportune moment... and complain about the endless insoluble problems brought about by their typical asocial tendencies...

I'm just not seeing a stitch of this in you, William. Particularly, I noticed that you don't VI as ENTp, according to some VI article I read on this site (I forgot where) - particularly the "outward manner" of the two types that was described. You clearly have a friendly, outgoing, willing-to-join-the-party look. You just don't resemble that little video or whatever you call it at the bottom of your page of ENTp, at all. :

You know I keep saying that I think ESFj/ESE is a better fit for you. But maybe that's just because I'm too influenced by your self-typing as that for so long. I know I could be wrong, since I certainly do not feel dead-sure on your type as ESE. But at least I do feel confident that its a better fit for you than ILE.

You certainly have some reason for not seeing yourself as ESE, having tried it on for a good while. You say Intuitive, not Sensing, but I am NeFi, subtype Ne, so, I ought to recognize Ne - and I just am not seeing pronounced Ne in you - like I do in ENTp's. Probably that's why I keep reverting back to the Sensing for you; I realize its not really because I see Sensing traits. (This Negativist is better at seeing she thinks you are not.) But. now I am thinking that perhaps my not seeing N is you is because you are more Ni than Ne...

Furthermore, I often perceive in you strong presence of Fe. At least, its certainly stronger than mine.

So, look at what else that article says of ENTp's:

...Warning: male Dons may in fact be a Huxley (IEE) or Hamlet (EIE)....

Maybe you are EIE, William? I keep seeing you as having a kind of similarity with EIE-McBain. I don't know what he looks like - never saw him - but, his persona, as it comes across in what he writes here - that.

Did you ever consider EIE for yourself, Wm? Its worth considering. Particularly because that ISFp/SEI, who is the "peace" of the ENTp, is instead, EIE's definition of "anti-peace". As EIE's supervisor, the dear, mild, kind, supportive ISFp/SEI is the MOST psychologically damaging type for EIE! As a long-term partner, she could truly drive EIE insane. An available, dating EIE man wants to be looking to identify the SEIs around him so he can AVOID them. And be scoping for the lovely logical analyst, ISTj, who will make him happy, forever...

[darya]

Maybe you are EIE, William?

Fuck no.

[ghost of forum past]

It at least seems that you are an obvious Ep type. Based on this and what you have said, ILE seems like a good fit, especially with Fi-PoLR. ESE males essentially don't exist, anyway.

[RedMarquee]

You just got to find which ones are your 4d functions. These guys can't be faked.

1. What elements have the greatest recall ability?
2. What elements do you notice you're the shit at compared to everyone else?
3. Which elements bring outside information from the situation in assessments?
4. Which elements seem to be always on?

A 2d function won't hit any of those for sure. So you just weigh Se and Ne on these and you'll know straight up what the hell you are.

[Eliza Thomason]

What's up, Eliza!

I think the type descriptions in this thread are a bit exaggerated, or cartoonish as you said, and shouldn't be taken too seriously. But yes, I relate to parts of the ILE description here. Living in a mess, having old/tattered clothing, and being a bit clumsy at times. (my mom just got me a plant today for Easter. Yes, sappy, I know. On the drive home, it toppled over in my passenger seat and spilled soil all over my car. I was infuriated, especially as this is the 2nd time in the past couple months it's happened. Last time I spilled spaghetti/marinara sauce everywhere. I would think a sensor in general, stereotypically would be more careful and better suited for physical matters and preventing things like that.)

Are you referring to the signature? At the bottom of my posts? Are you saying that video doesn't represent an ENTp, or that I don't resemble it? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there. It's actually mu in my signature who is likely ILE. He's a particularly unique type though in that he's also enneagram 4. ILEs who are e4 are very rare. e4 in terms of Jung definitions and in the actually enneagram book is more typically associated with Ni.

If you're able to find the VI article you're referencing that would be great, but in the meantime, I'd like to point to a source I use, examples of all of the socionics types with videos - just click here. I think people like Conan O'Brien and Craig Ferguson are good examples of 'outward' ILEs. Conan being somewhat socially awkward but trying to be humorous in an Alpha, innocent, geekish, uncoordinated way, and Craig being Alpha Ne humorous with all of his innuendos, sexual references, suave randomness, etc. Craig on that list is under SEE, but I think ILE is viable too. In general, LIIs can be extremely awkward, but ILEs can be very outgoing too, while also needing downtime of course.

I didn't relate to the ESE descriptions for how much they focus on the mood and tend to emote. They also typically love people, whereas I don't socialize very much at all. I'd rather be working and investing my time productively, instead of spending it and wasting it with people I probably won't even want to hang out with 5 years from now. The ESE descriptions also give me the impression that they generally like people, whereas I don't like people as much - I like people in general but I can see all of their faults.

I don't like retyping people anymore as people take their types personally and get offended easily. But for the sake of argument, since you used yourself as a comparison to me, as an example of Ne - I don't consider it a given that you're IEE. I've considered ESE for you actually. I think we may be Alpha Activity partners. You seem to emote much more than I do, engage with more people for fun than I do, and seem to talk about sensory things much moreso than I do. So if you feel we communicate differently, one could consider the perspective that yes, we're both not using Ne, but that is not for my half of the bargain not keeping up, but perhaps yours.

McBain is cool. I haven't interacted with him a whole lot yet, but so far I can see similarities between us. But no, I do not consider us the same socionics type. (I can see communication differences as well)

I have never seriously considered EIE for myself, no. People for the longest time notice I either ignore Ni or don't value it. When I read the EIE descriptions, I don't relate to the EIE general moodiness, or trying to warn people about negative things that can happen in the future. I normally think 'fuck people, let the idiots die'. lol . I have considered Beta ST before, but in general reject it, as I don't relate to Beta intensity or Se-valuing. I'm pretty obviously Si/Ne- valuing.

Okay, so you feel sure you are Alpha. I just am getting beginning impressions/understandings of the differences in Quadras. This article from this site is very helpful for me: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...cs-Four-Quadra. So I suppose then that you would say that that description of Alpha fits you?

I just want to make clear I did not type you as EIE, I only considered it was a possiblity, and checked with you to see if you agreed. And I appreciate your feedback. I like understanding types. As to "retyping" - I sometimes do have a strong idea that someone is a different type than they say they are. But I quickly learned that some people - not all - get really offended by that and I hate to offend people so I am careful when I do. Generally it is just like what I said to you - considering a different type for someone, asking their input. I like understanding differences in types, thats all, but not if my inquiries and deductions offend anyone.

I percieved that you would not be offended if I shared my ideas on this. And if you were to give me the idea it personally offends you for me to consider your type, then of course I would drop it. But I don't see you taking it that way.

Thanks for these thoughts. It has me reconsidering my ideas of ENTp, which maybe you are, if you are convinced. I have a hard time seeing Conan O'Brien that way - yes, maybe more SLE for him? But that is just a guess off the top of my head, influenced by what you said. I think I clearly do not know the ENTp type that well. I have a friend who is ENTp I have known a long time, but really I know his SEI wife a lot better than him, and though I know their life, we don't sit around discussing her husband and how he thinks.

That comment about mu - yes, I know it's mu. I just remember that one time I got on chatroom with you and mu and abbie, and you and mu seemed to have completely different contenances. However, perhaps mu is more hidden by the glasses.

The klutzy thing you described does remind me of my ENTp friend who is kind of that way. Particularly that he is messy, too, due to the fact he is into so many interesting things and can jump easily from one thing to the next. Good thing he has his SEI wife to clean up for him. BTW, have you known SEIs in your life, family or close friend? Do you feel comfortable around them?

With your comments on ESE, I see now why you would say you don't feel you are ESE (and probably are not). Yes, ESEs generally love people and love to socialize, and do it very well. My ex was ESE, and so are 2 or 3 of friends with whom I have been close and known long. ESEs really are the most completely-comfortable persons in all social situations (in fact, this trait most impressed me abou my ESE ex in the beginning, that he was so amazingly comfortable in social situations), and most pronounced is that they are ALWAYS active socially, particularly with family and realatives, where they take a center role and a very active one, but also they always are active socially in some other groups as well (including very social at work). So if that doesn't describe you then probably you are not! It doesn't describe me, also, nor does Alpha's "Merry, Democratic". I am definitely Serious, and also Aristocratic (which gets me in trouble with Democrats in this type forum, when I start generalzing about the way types are... they get mad and annoyed! Also, I think the Merrys here find me a bit dull at times).

I'm curious, Wm, since you are most likely an Alpha, as you say, could you imagine seeing me, as supposedly an Alpha would: "kindly and creative, but a bit too serious in [my] ideals and principles and too demanding of the same from others."? I know My ESE freinds see me that way - a bit too serious, and definitely too interested in ideals and principles that they are just not nearly as interested in. It doesn't bother me becasue I don't need their validation in this area. (I do notice I don't have thier validation in this, but its okay with me because I admire their other gifts, and just see them as a different type of person from me).

[Myst]

I have never seriously considered EIE for myself, no. People for the longest time notice I either ignore Ni or don't value it. When I read the EIE descriptions, I don't relate to the EIE general moodiness, or trying to warn people about negative things that can happen in the future. I normally think 'fuck people, let the idiots die'. lol . I have considered Beta ST before, but in general reject it, as I don't relate to Beta intensity or Se-valuing. I'm pretty obviously Si/Ne- valuing.

I do think you are Ne valuing, you pissed me off in my type thread trying to guess bullshit stuff at my motivations.

Kinda see it as Ne HA.

[Myst]

Also Fi-PoLR very, very, very well explains much of my time on this forum, and unintentionally pissing the majority of people off at some point in time or other, at least half of the time unintentionally. The other times... welllll.... But seriously - understanding & relating to people hasn't exactly been my forte, and I've always had reservations about self-typing as ESE for that reason - since they seem so much more naturally pleasant around others than I am. I try to avoid the spotlight - I only come in to wreck chaos when I feel I have a point to make.

Nah ESEs piss some people off easily, one doesnt need Fi PoLR for that

Btw I have no idea what type you are, just sure on the Ne/Si valuing

[Myst]

1. Any element has great recall ability. The functions are a measure of information metabolism, what information is noticed first. Each type can have a great memory, remembering details & things related to their Ego functions.

Actually, no, not all IEs have great recall ability. At least considering my own example, no

Also, not all information will get noticed much, so it's not simply about what gets noticed first. Information related to weaker IE's will be noticed less and also the information related to ID functions is not noticed easily in a conscious fashion.

*Edit* It has been brought to my attention that I seemed to misread question #2 (it's late at night here, and I don't have my contacts in). I didn't see "the" before shit, meaning the 'best' at, as opposed to 'shit' at. To answer that, well obviously Ne & Ti, since I self-type as ILE. To explain further would be redundant.

Now why would this be redundant to explain to further? Why not describe how you see your Ne and Ti as being the best at them compared to other people?

Ah, pissing people off, one of my greatest skills and past-times.

You say you're not sure on type, but then suggested Ne HA, which would imply XSE, yes? I agree on the Ne/Si valuing, particularly Alpha>Delta.

I also think speculation on others' motivations can be necessary to discovering how they will act. For the sake of minimizing incorrect Ne intuitive leaps, one must gather more data. Sometimes it is necessary to poke and prod people to see how they will react in pain. Sorry about that, but it was really nothing personal. (I'm working on being less obnoxious in general. People don't always voluntarily sign up to be part of an experiment)

Well, I assumed HA only because you seemed to just want to confirm your guesses but you now are willing to admit that you were just poking around?

Good thing you mentioned it was nothing personal or I'd have already executed you. (Just a joke)

Anyway. If that's true then you can be ILE just fine. Have fun with your ILE-ness.

I do want to add, you seemed to be running around me for no reason. It was really annoying and seemed to have no point other than you wanting to interfere for some reason and keep questioning my motives and make up bullshit about them. What do you think that says about our intertype relations if you are ILE? Just curious

[Eliza Thomason]

Yes, I read your link and identify the most with Alpha values..

You may also be interested in this article on Quadra values: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

Yes, SEIs are *perfect*, dare I say. This tender and sweet and caring and unassuming and know how to create a cozy environment. (**but duality can be overrated anyway) .

Perhaps. But the very best marriages I know are Duals. There are very good longterm ones of other types, but the very-happy, most comfortable, most admirable, most enviable ones are Duals. I know two different amazing SEI/ILE couples. Its a very good thing! In particular what I have noticed about those couples is the ILE husbands are very active in their worlds, and excel in their professions, and in their recreation, and they just love life. And both SEI wives take excellent care of their homes and their families, and really sort of live for their husbands, and for his comfort, taking care of everything he needs, without criticizing him, instead, always supportive, and they are just very happy loving their husbands deeply and faithfully and constantly. And these are both long marriages that have endured many trials but both couples have remained very happy and devoted throughout life's trials together. One ILE husband is a computer expert, high level management for large corporation, and talented musician and talented at fixing everything, and takes the family on vacations everywhere. The other ILE husband I know less well than his wife, but he has his own successful business (printing) and is active in recreation with yachts, motorboats, jet skis, snow mobiles, etc., also active and devoted with his family.

Yes, I agree ESEs tend to take a central role in family events. I've questioned the necessity of family events and meetups before. I feel like an asshole when I used to, but it's reasons like this which make me doubt ESE for myself. .

Its a VERY good reason to doubt ESE for you.

I don't think ESEs are typically comfortable in *every* social situation. I would not consider that a prerequisite of being the ESE type..

I suppose there must be some social situations they are not comfortable in but the ESEs I know are very comfortable in them. They always do the right thing for the group, too.

I can see ESE for you in being serious with your religious beliefs, yes..

Well, I can tell here that you are not seeing the big IEE/ESE difference of approach to religion. Here is one big tell: The ESE is more involved in the social action of the religious organization. The IEE is more interested in the ideas/theories and professed beliefs on the religion they belong to. At the fellowship dinner or coffee hour, ESE are all over the place making sure everyone is greeted, or they are laughing with a table-full of people. The IEE at the same dinner or coffee hour can stay in the same spot talking/listening to the same person, or maybe has two or three different small but deep conversations, making a deep emotional connection with these individuals in the middle of the social occasion. ESE, instead, talks to a LOT of people, and has a voice that carries out and a laugh that carries out, engaging (and welcoming) many people in whatever they say. Even ESE's one-on-one conversation is heard by others around them, and others are invited in. They are "interruptable". Not so much the IEE's intimate conversation. Also, socially, the ESE is involved in all kinds of group service projects, while IEE is make meals to bring to shut-ins. IEE is the one you call to discuss finer points of theology. ESEs that I know will not hold interest in a theological conversation for too long. None of the ESEs I know I have ever discussed really theology with - they will graciously change the subject to another (they are not rude about it; they have social finesse). And none of them could tell you a great deal about the theology of their particular brand of Christianity. I can tell you all about mine, and yours, and your neighbor's, and all the fine points of the differences. This is a conversation that all of the ESEs I know would be disinterested in. (and its one of my favorite things to discuss).

ESEs tend to moralize and judge others often, and they're probably the biggest Alpha type to impose their judgments on others. .

Hmm, it depends on what you mean by judging. I have judgments on actions but my judgments of persons even to myself are rare. And most MOST of the time, no one knows my judgments of actions. I keep them to myself. Until someone's immoral actions are hurting someone else - then I do jump in to defend the hurt one. I am sensitive to the psychological hurt of others. As to actions, someone may be blabbing about who they slept with, and I will be thinking, its too bad they don't know how that is hurting them. However, I won't say anything, because I know everyone has motivations/reasons I do not understand, and unless they want to talk about that, which in most cases that is not possible, there is no point in talking about the actions that resulted from their inner motivation. So for psychological reasons, and respect for others whose actions make sense to them in their circumstances, I keep my judgment of their action to myself. Because I can't know hearts; only God does. (And tell myself, "there but for the grace of God go I")...

Then there is the ESEs I know who do not judge. At least in a SOCIAL situation. They value positive social interactions, and avoid anything socially that is judging. Hmm, well, they do do the right thing socially, and they do gripe abotu people who have done the wrong thing socially. At home, perhaps its different. My ESE ex, I do not know how much is due to type and how much his Narcisissm, was constantly judging me negatively, my choices, how I used my time, how I did things the wrong way or not enough - well, it was pretty constant. I do not know how type-related that is, though. Besides the Narcissim, part of it could be the J/P difference which is irritating for those sharing their lives day-to-day. I had an ESE friend roommate for one college summer but I did not see any of this in her. But she may have kept annoyances to herself in favor of positive social interactions for the short-term living situation. So, I do not know if you are referring to perhaps an ESE parent when you say they judge. They might be harder on family members. I have seen many situations where a "J" parent is so irritated, annoyed, and judging of a "P" child. Such was the case with my ESI mother with me, whome she was most annoyed with, and sometimes she was annoyed with my SLI brother. But she was very happy with her LSI/LSE sons. SLI brother and I were more annoyed by her judging ways than they were. I the most!

You seem to be pretty positive and peppy and fun and talkative and social most of the time, imo Eliza, .

I like to be positive - that's true. Maritsa and I were talking about how she is a "negative Postivist" and I am a "positive Negativist". I like to relate positively to others - this is consistent about me - but examine my language and you will see evidence of the Negativist speech patterns of my type. As far as fun, I can be overly serious, especially to merry types like the ESEs I have know. I like people, so in that way I am social, but unlike ESE I prefer people individually, and am happy to avoid group events. I am definitely very selective (and limited) about the group events I attend. The ESEs I know have calenders FULL of group events, and they NEVER seem to feel its "too many". That's another big difference between ESE and me.

but tend to freeze up and become rigid when defending your moral beliefs. You've posted a few threads about Christianity as well, iirc.

I wonder what you mean by freeze up? Do you mean: get rigid? I can be rigid in my core beliefs, which are well thought out, having evolved and change though much thought, and I can discuss them in depth. I am only too aware that most people don't want to go that deep. So if I "freeze" (meaning: don't discuss) its because I think who I am talking to is not interested. For example, lots of people want to dismiss Christianity without ever examining it - they just parrot others wrong conclusions about it. I don't know what to do with that, I just get stuck. Why would you make a judgment on something you have not examined? People want to hold onto their judgments/conclusions, no matter how flimsy, and if they are closed to examining what is true, then what can I do?

There you go. Some strong ESE/IEE differences.

So, the way I see it now, you are probably ILE like you think. My only obstacle was wondering why I did not recognize Ne in you since its stron in me and in ILE. But I think I foudn the answer to that in that article I posted at top. There is a difference in how Delta and Alpha express Ne! I was not aware of the differences in Ne expressions: the -Ne and +Ne. So now it makes sense. Here they are:

Alpha's +Ne = promising ideas. In this quadra, which can be attributed the element of air, there are frequent talks about the future, the unexplored and unknown possibilities. They may seem to be incorrigible dreamers. And this is so: they look out further than anyone, beyond the horizon, they put forward "crazy" theories and discuss them with pleasure. Some of these theories, however, are destined to have long lives, so long that they will outlast their creators.

Delta's -Ne = the unusual, alternative and bizarre. Despite its groundedness, this quadra respects unusual and talented people who offer creative alternative possibilities. The spread of new information is not impeded, no matter how avant-garde it might be. In Delta groups, there occur periodic flashes of sensationalism and spikes of interest centered around original people who put forward alternative ideas of development.

[Eliza Thomason]

Here is an account of how four different types use their Ne, and then how those same four types use their Ni (whc. we can confuse for Ne). In each description, I am bolding the parts I have particularly noticed in those types that I know of those types. (Sorry. I just had to!) These are culled from Sociotype.com.

ILE's Ne (No.1 Leading Function, Ego Block):

The ILE is typically a "big picture" kind of person, and tends to speak in generalizations about both people and things, omitting any details he deems mundane or uninteresting. He is acutely aware of what interests and what bores him. This leads him to always search for novelty and surprising things. At any given moment, the ILE usually has a number of projects and/or skills that he is working on developing, and stays with these interests as long as he feels they have potential for growth. The ILE gets bored easily with rote tasks that do involve lots of repetition and little innovation, although he tolerates them if they are necessary to succeed in society.

The ILE is a creative thinker, and enjoys discussing his often unusual perspectives with others. These will often be expressed through unique and strange (but effective) analogies.

The ILE is constantly aware of the possibilities inherent in social, natural or other systems, and of the areas with the greatest potential within them.

The ILE operates by using Extroverted Intuition to attune themselves to the multiple variables continually being expressed within the environment and proceeds to elucidate feasible connections and boundaries of context in order to change the way one perceives that which is operating below the surface of either everyday life or more dynamic technical arenas. To An ILE, the world is a vast network of stars with infinitely interchangeable constellations emerging from the open-ended framework. Extroverted Intuition as a leading function pushes with white-hot intensity the active rearranging of the lego-blocks of reality; not necessarily with any intention towards construction or creativity, but with the ultimate goal of introducing novelty and fresh perspectives. Combined with Introverted Thinking as a secondary function, Extroverted Intuition finds compatible yet more disciplined, objective thinking to harness its irrational, unruled nature into a potentially functional talent.

IEE's Ne (like ILE, its the No.1 Leading Function, Ego Block, but expressed so differently:

IEEs are predominantly motivated by their feelings of interest and boredom. They are attracted to novel ideas, unusual or peculiar goings-on in day-to day life, and new experiences. They may have a tendency to frequently engage themselves in novel life "projects," which can and often consist of novel concepts or fields of thought, new activities, and new lifestyles (this list is not all-inclusive). These types of projects often take the form of activities that are uncommon, concepts that are unknown or avocations that have not been done or tried before. Regardless of the nature of their interests, they often have a tendency to try to accumulate as much knowledge about the field as they can, and sometimes to improve the field by finding new ways of conceptually framing its basic principles (needs an example). Eventually, once there is nothing left to discover, or when they simply become bored, they will follow their curiosity and find a new topic of interest.

Many IEEs require a certain degree of freedom from obligation in order to do their work and pursue their sometimes idiosyncratic interests, to the point where they may dramatically eschew conventional lifestyles. Some IEEs may have an irrational dread of working at a desk job or an office where they do not have the opportunity to pursue their whimsical hobbies. However, they often overestimate the torturous ordeal of having to perform specific chores that are not in line with their interests, and many IEEs that are acclimated to the reality of their obligations may not share this trepidation at having to fulfill them.

IEEs are often spontaneous and sometimes quite distractible individuals whose natural energy level leads them to be working on something or doing something most of the time (in contrast to dominant types whose natural state is one of inertia and contemplation). However their work is often periodic in nature rather and tends to be on whatever projects they have involved themselves in at the moment, or whatever they are interested in doing at the moment, rather than a consistent schedule or routine. Many IEEs routinely have spur-of-the-moment ideas or curiosities, and may be inclined to look up random information or do arbitrary things that have occurred to them in lieu of whatever they might have been working on previously.

IEEs, perhaps more than any other type, often have a tendency to seek out multiple perspectives and viewpoints on controversial matters. They are rarely tied down to any particular ideology and often have an implicit sense of faith that others are as intellectually open as they are. IEEs frequently have a innately optimistic disposition (despite how bleak they perceive the facts of any situation to be), and often earnestly believe in the value of a process of thorough, respectful, and politically correct discussion of controversial matters, and often that through a such due process of formal exposition of viewpoints, most reasonable people will come to a consensus as to the essential facts and truth of the debate.

IEEs often tend to mentalize and verbalize matters of personal development, individual qualities, and significant personal experiences, and often develop connections best with others through disucssing matters of personal development that are close at heart to them. They may have a sort of innate tendency to spontaneously try to help others find an appropriate outlet for their particular talents, focusing on the potential positive aspects of their character; they may become engrossed over what people might become rather than what they are currently, and thus have a tendency to be able to see the positive side of everyone.


ESE's Ne is down in their mobilizing function, Superidblock, place 6 in Model A:

ESEs are typically quite open to a wide variety of new ideas. They often have a reserved, receptive, and patiently interested view of the academic world. They may be inclined to seek out new, unusual, or interesting information related to goings-on in the world around them, and to share their interests. They may have little confidence in their ability to understand abstract material, but they may typically react to new concepts or information with interest and curiosity. They may seek clarity from others about the unusual ideas they come across, requesting cogent and simple explanations.

ESEs may have difficulty coming up with new or innovative ideas, evaluating the potential of certain ideas, or engaging in conceptual juxtaposition or lateral thinking. Nonetheless, they are sometimes be seen as somewhat more bright and imaginative, energetic, and fantasy-oriented than LSEs (though LSEs can be imaginative as well). They may also come across as kooky, novel, and spontaneous, and may be inclined to offer suggestions for new fun activities or to make observations of unusual, amusing, or bizarre qualities of things, though they may do so in a lighthearted and cheery way, and may be averse to depressive or darkly-themed novelties. Usually imagination in ESEs is a corollary of their charming social persona, and a supplement to a jovial, outgoing attitude.

ESEs may typically have a more positive, optimistic, inclusive, and receptive slant to their emotionalism than beta types. Usually, their emotionality focuses on lighthearted and fun aspects, avoiding darker or melodramatic themes. They may stereotypically preach values of universal tolerance and friendliness.


SEE's Ne is in spot no.3, Super-Ego Block, the ROLE FUNCTION. This is particularly interested in me because there are more than one here at 16t who self-type my IEE but, to their annoyance, I feel sure are inhstead another type, often, SEE, as we don't think alike, or use NE in the same way. So, this is how a SEE uses Ne:

SEEs can be accomplished at offering perceptive potential explanations for the things going on around them. They are capable of generating novel conceptual structures and comparisons. They may make an effort to appear to have a handle on understanding and developing possibilities or potential mechanisms to apply to their environment, but in general they may tend to find such thinking tedious of minimal use in interpreting the actual effects of their actions in the real world.

As a lifestyle matter, SEEs are often oriented towards productive activity; they can be often impatient with abstract explanations or ideas, and they usually prefer tangible accounts of worldly affairs, and information that they can use and apply. They may prefer to work in real-world contexts or on projects that are subject to their influence, as opposed to trying to effectuate overly intangible ideas. They are more interested in identifying and understanding the processes around them and consequences of their actions than having to understand the underlying abstract conceptual framework. They may also be oriented towards thinking about longer term plans as opposed to evaluating extemporaneous or random experiences or information.

SEEs may find it difficult to consciously process ambiguity, uncertainty, or potentiality. When working on their goals, they may prefer to deal with any problems as they arise, rather than preparing for specific possible outcomes, of which they may have difficulty keeping track. They may sometimes become irrational or distressed if others around them become unpredictable or erratic, or if their environment becomes unresponsive to their pressuring influence.

SEEs are aware that there is often more to a person than meets the eye at first, and try to keep that in mind; yet their inclination is to trust more what their own experiences of that person have told them, especially when evaluating their capacity for work and assertiveness.

___________________-

I'm going off on a SEE-tangent here. So Wm, you may not be interested in this. Unless you have SEEs in your life you think about.

I have two SEEs in my real life, one current, one past, so I am interested in understanding SEE. In both of these women - one was my only hired caretaker for my Mom, the other is my dh's daughter - at first our relationships were initially positive until we had conflicts to solve, then they were markedly difficult - SEEs are dramatic, and I do not like to be dramatic when solving problems, but, now, with time, they are both very positive relationships again. The latter (and most important!) is instead very, very positive now! I am glad. Things that intimidated me in them before don't now. I just understand them more.

Anyway, the reason for this tangent is that I notice more of the Ni in the SEEs I know than the Ne. Some of my arguments here in this forum with IEEs I thought were SEEs always includes their assertions that they use Ne a lot, and when they describe their Ne its not how I use Ne - its not familiar at all. I have assumed that's because what they are calling Ne is actually their Ni. Perhaps its so.

SEE's Ni is in their Super-Id block, place 5, Suggestive Function. I am not fully understanding of Model A enough to know why their Function 5 seems stronger to me than their function 3? I have more to learn! Anyway, here is their Ni expression, for consideration:

SEEs often have rapid-fire and uncontrolled thinking processes. They are not naturally reflective or contemplative of what they experience, and may regularly fail to consider the consequences or implications of their actions. They may have difficulty concentrating on their mental trains of thought and tend to be inclined to make hasty and impassioned conclusions about the state of their affairs. They can exhibit a tendency to conceptualize their world in overly simplistic terms, without recognizing the degree of intricacy and complexity of the situations around them. In general, they welcome the perspectives of others who can reason with a slower thinking process and help them to carefully mentalize the world around them.

SEEs often lack caution and reserve. Their strategy towards solving problems may involve persuasion and brute force; their natural response to opposition or obstacle is to display further aggression or resistance, including in instances where such resistance is not necessarily appropriate. They may be distraught, tempestuous, and highly emotionally turbulent when their strategy fails. Because of their manic instability, they can exhibit accusatory or antagonistic tendencies towards others; some SEEs fall into a cycle of ruining their relationships or vocational prospects in this way.

SEEs are naturally attracted to individuals who seem knowledgeable and secure as to how events will develop from a given starting point, giving them a more strategic perspective to their own more instinctive tactical approach. They are inclined to make impulsive decisions, based on immediate and short-term considerations, which the SEEs nevertheless hopes will have a positive result in the context of their long-term goals. They expect assistance from others in that regard, and are disappointed if they do not receive it.

SEEs can be insecure about the negative consequences of their actions. They may tend to instinctively suppress and avoid thinking of the negative or painful aspects of their history that their recklessness may have caused. They may lack a calming or guiding influence in their lives, and sometimes attempt compulsively seek out individuals or environments that they feel can unshroud mysteries to resolve their internal chaos.

__________

And since I am this far, here is how ILE and IEE use Ni:

IEE's Ni is down in her ignoring function, no. 7, id block:

The IEE thoroughly understands discussions and arguments focused on following present trends into the future and their possible implications, as well as on exploring one specific imaginative vision of personal meaning, but he much prefers to explore many possibilities, starting from a present point in time and reality, rather than to concentrate on just a few specific visions or trends. He understands that the present moment may be changeable or not be as it seems, but refuses to think too much on the matter, choosing instead to keep a more practical view. To an IEE, the question "What if?" usually applies to something that the IEE can do to change his future, not some sort of alternate reality, such as "What if I bike instead of drive to work?" as opposed to "What if gravity didn't exist?"



ILE's Ni is ALSO in his ignoring function, no.7, id block:

While the ILE may seem entirely spontaneous to the observer, he will often plan extensively for the fallout of his ideas in order to rally the support of others and guide it towards actualization. As a by-product, most ILEs will view lectures about foresight and planning as irritating and unnecessary. There is no need to go over that which he has already considered, in the privacy of his own mind.

Additionally, with too much attention to consequences the ILE loses the thrill of discovery associated with his base function and finds it difficult to think outside of Ni's natural complement: Se. He prefers to think about immediate possibilities (Ne) and what can be done to materialize them (Ti) rather than to dwell on the outcome of what might or might not be.


ESE's Ni is in itsVulnerable function, place 4, Super-Ego Block:

ESEs are often restless, dynamic, and active people, and have little interest in contemplative and reflective lifestyles. They may generally find themselves perennially busy, with so many people to meet and tasks to be done. They may often have difficulty understanding the motivations or mindset of less energetic individuals, or why others would be unmotivated and torpid. They may have have difficulty prioritizing or determining the relative importance of their tasks, and may ignore the long-term consequences of their actions. They may have difficulty planning their schedule effectively, sometimes be caught off guard by certain last minute appointments or tasks whose length they had underestimated.

ESEs typically focus on the tasks, people, relationships, experiences directly in front of them, seeing little reason to question its purpose, impact, or meaning. They may have underactive minds, and may have difficulty connecting the dots and discerning causal links between different events in their environment. They may have no concept of philosophical reflection, or inner mental worlds as a lifestyle attribute, and may see these aspects as irrelevant to their emotions and experiences. To "sit back and think for a while" is commonly the antithesis of the ESE mindset. Due to their lack of cerebral lifestyles, they may be seen as tedious, unoriginal, and unchanging in their conduct.