muddy's type

[The Exception]

That's what he said in the interview, too, and frankly I think any normal person would try to pull the dog away from the kid. I was surprised as how lucid his explanation was in the interview, but when the actual situation arose he hesitated. It was like he knew what needs to be done, but it didn't quite come together for him in the moment.

Well, who knows. Maybe I would hesitate too it I was put into the actual situation.
Hard to know for sure unless I was placed into the actual situation.

How do you experience Ne-creative and Si-hidden agenda btw?

Ne creative: Always thinking up possible angles and tangents for my ideas.
Si hidden agenda: Strive to be healthy and physically comfortable but also don't like to put too much effort and time into sensory matters

I disagree(about him, not you). It sounds like other non-typology related stuff. These exact problems are why mbti invented step II. And this is why I disagree:

You(again, this is directed at muddy) tend to receive information as is, right? That's why you sound so specific. I am positive that if I ran more S / N exercises that you'd come out on the S side. Again, I feel as if the modern typology pumped up some stuff up to 11. S / N are just information gathering tools. That's it! Nothing more, nothing less.

Well some INTPs can be quite specific and thorough on topics of interest and importance to them. They seek logical precision and accuracy. This is different then a more sensory oriented specificity. The specificity here is on logic and ideas. I know I can be exhaustively thorough and specific too at times. Mostly when it pertains to logical ideas.

[nondescript]

Well, who knows. Maybe I would hesitate too it I was put into the actual situation.
Hard to know for sure unless I was placed into the actual situation.



Ne creative: Always thinking up possible angles and tangents for my ideas.
Si hidden agenda: Strive to be healthy and physically comfortable but also don't like to put too much effort and time into sensory matters



Well some INTPs can be quite specific and thorough on topics of interest and importance to them. They seek logical precision and accuracy. This is different then a more sensory oriented specificity. The specificity here is on logic and ideas. I know I can be exhaustively thorough and specific too at times. Mostly when it pertains to logical ideas.

I don't care about that and you know it. The only important thing is: You see a thing and immediately translate it into an idea(no matter if it is a logical, productive / functional or other), yes? We are talking about perceptions now, mind you and perceptions are irrational after all. And he has trouble with two things: S / N preference and P / J preference. If you ask me, P / J confusion stems from not knowing whether you extrovert a rational or an irrational function and that further leads us towards a person not being completely certain of one of core preferences( snft ). And when you become particularly certain both how you perceive things and how you think...it's mostly a GG from that point onwards.

[Myst]

I don't think LSI is nearly as likely simply because I don't see myself being Ne polr. I see anything particularly lacking or painful regarding my Ne, nor do I feel any kind of threat from Ne egos. Se on the other hand I have more doubts over my ability to use adequately, especially around other people.

Se polr at least with me seems to manifest as being very sensitive about having hostile attitudes directed towards me rather than just fear of purely physical danger. When I'm around strangers I am very cautious about anything that might provoke an aggressive response. Even just some random asshole on flipping me off on the road for not driving correctly is enough to ruin my day. I also seem to have trouble taking the initiative with things even when I know I need to. I have low determination and I am easily discouraged out of achieving my goals. I have difficulty tolerating bossy behavior and often get into conflicts with those who place a high demand on others.

This does sound like Se PoLR with Fe DS specifically. Talk about your Ne too.

That sounds like weak Fi/Fe - not knowing how to read and set people's attitudes and regulate your own emotions are issues with ethical functions - and has nothing to do with Se but strong logic and weak Fx. It sounds almost Fi-PoLR, but you said that you're certain that you're introverted.

What, I don't think that's Fi PoLR. It does involve 1D Ethics but what he described is a rather stereotypical LII thing. Fe DS with low Se on top of it.

Bossy behavior again isn't related to Se. You have described LSEs as bossy: "LSE: Bossy and full of conflicts" - yet consider that Se is not in their quadra values, and neither one of their strongly displayed functions (EIIs wouldn't stick around if it were).

As far as my understanding goes, demonstrative should be pretty strongly displayed at times actually but without putting focus on it, without verbalizing it, discussing it, overall not imposing it on the dual's PoLR.

It's true that Se is just a perception function but if you are out of touch with it then you'll easily have those Se PoLR problems because dealing with such issues requires some focus on the Se "as is" objective perception. With that objective Se a certain brand of readiness comes, it's a state to respond in an extraverted fashion unlike Si and also readiness in terms of dealing with all the objective Se data which is necessary in conflict situations too including not shying away from uncomfortable perceptions / situations exactly because Se is objective, not dealing with subjective response to stimuli, unlike Si.

[Myst]

I don't care about that and you know it. The only important thing is: You see a thing and immediately translate it into an idea(no matter if it is a logical, productive / functional or other), yes? We are talking about perceptions now, mind you and perceptions are irrational after all. And he has trouble with two things: S / N preference and P / J preference. If you ask me, P / J confusion stems from not knowing whether you extrovert a rational or an irrational function and that further leads us towards a person not being completely certain of one of core preferences( snft ). And when you become particularly certain both how you perceive things and how you think...it's mostly a GG from that point onwards.

You do need to understand the difference between different ways of being specific. Ti can sound quite specific in its own way for the reasons already mentioned. Don't confuse that with S/N. But do give OP more S / N tests, lol. Have fun

[Muddy]

That sounds like weak Fi/Fe - not knowing how to read and set people's attitudes and regulate your own emotions are issues with ethical functions - and has nothing to do with Se but strong logic and weak Fx. It sounds almost Fi-PoLR, but you said that you're certain that you're introverted.


Bossy behavior again isn't related to Se. You have described LSEs as bossy: "LSE: Bossy and full of conflicts" - yet consider that Se is not in their quadra values, and neither one of their strongly displayed functions (EIIs wouldn't stick around if it were).

At its very basic Se is a perceiving function. It doesn't have or provide a 'direction' by itself (like the 'direction' needed to tell you what to do and boss you around) - it merely allows a person to consider their perceptions in objective manner: it's "what is", not go do this or that.

Which types btw do you perceive as bossy besides LSEs?

The role function is still a superego function, and even though it may not be as bad as the polr it can still cause the individual a lot of distress. At the very least it seems to be further confirmation I am not INTp.

I find that pretty much all Te egos can be bossy at times, just that LSEs tend to be the worst. LSIs and ESIs can at times be controlling but they only seem to act that way when they are stressed.

My strong distaste for Te does seem rather interesting. It seems to be making relations that should otherwise be positive more resemblant of conflict. For a short time I even considered IEI because of my adverseness to Te types. I don't consider my own Te weak however, just that I have a very low valuing of it.

I disagree(about him, not you). It sounds like other non-typology related stuff. These exact problems are why mbti invented step II. And this is why I disagree:

You(again, this is directed at muddy) tend to receive information as is, right? That's why you sound so specific. I am positive that if I ran more S / N exercises that you'd come out on the S side. Again, I feel as if the modern typology pumped up some stuff up to 11. S / N are just information gathering tools. That's it! Nothing more, nothing less.

I am always open to more N/S test.

[Sol]

I find that pretty much all Te egos can be bossy at times

Any types can and do such where they are sure - in their strong regions. Extraverted do it in a more demonstrative way, T types less tactful, S more directly. While Se types like the power itself. Most "bossy" are ESTP.

[Myst]

The role function is still a superego function, and even though it may not be as bad as the polr it can still cause the individual a lot of distress. At the very least it seems to be further confirmation I am not INTp.

I find that pretty much all Te egos can be bossy at times, just that LSEs tend to be the worst. LSIs and ESIs can at times be controlling but they only seem to act that way when they are stressed.

My strong distaste for Te does seem rather interesting. It seems to be making relations that should otherwise be positive more resemblant of conflict. For a short time I even considered IEI because of my adverseness to Te types. I don't consider my own Te weak however, just that I have a very low valuing of it.

That's interesting about your issues with Te. I'm pretty neutral about Te types myself. LIE's are actually cool a lot

Ok well individual differences...?

[Muddy]

That's interesting about your issues with Te. I'm pretty neutral about Te types myself. LIE's are actually cool a lot

Ok well individual differences...?

It could just be that the Te types I interacted with had other non socionics related issues. One of the LSEs I was around with was going to anger management and might have not been a good example of all LSEs. There must be serious problems when someone uses their demonstrative function against their duals. And yes, I am certain he was LSE and not SLE, Te and Si were very pronounced with strong delta values.

I can't say I've known any LIEs or ILIs very well, although I've gotten acquainted with some without issues.

[Sol]

It could just be that the Te types I interacted with had other non socionics related issues

Also, it could be other type too as in many cases you should type wrong. In most cases according to universal match <30%, even if you was not a novice and was sure about your own type.
But if you have >=3 random dudes of "same type" their traits (related by theory to types) may to be types related. Or your environment is a special case itself.

Have may look at examples of ESFJ in my lists. Do they drain energy or not as you've said in other thread.
"ESE: Warm and caring but tax my energy"
conflictors drain energy as vacuum cleaners, I suppose you could easily confound ESFJ and ESFP.
Similarily with ENFP
"IEE: Fun but drain away all my energy"
wich may be ESFP.
Then you may compare this trait with ESFP in lists.

Your current IR observations look as bullshit, hence either you had no enough examples to understand or typed many of them wrong. Several examples (better >=3 for every sex) you need to be sure in your impressions from concrete types.

And you can at last make normal video-interview wich fits my recommedations. It's not hard. This may help, if you'll not do another shit instead of typing video. To do something contradictory to what was asked is rather stupid, - you'll spend efforts but don't get what you made it for, while in other case you'll have rather more chance. If you'll do it, make a thread with the note in title about existence of the video in it.

Or you may continue to play with not much useful philosophizing on the forum, if you like the process itself. Ti types like it, I suppose.
As you think yourself INTJ, hence the problem is your "duals" don't give you impressions wich you await. Some other IR don't fit the theory good too. This may to be due your bad typing and hence incorrect examples, as I've said above. The most easy way for you to check your IR is to use my examples.

Wish you luck with your further useless reasonings, "not shitty" dude.

[Muddy]

Wish you luck with your further useless reasonings, "not shitty" dude.

wtf................

Anyway, thanks for your suggestions but I'm feeling more certain about my typing now. Its becoming clearer and clearer that I am Ti dom and I don't see Se being my creative function. I'm sure that all that people that know me well would consider me more of an intuitive then a sensor.

[Adam Strange]

That's interesting about your issues with Te. I'm pretty neutral about Te types myself. LIE's are actually cool a lot

Ok well individual differences...?

LIE's think LSI's are pretty cool, too, Myst. And I can tell you exactly why. Te-dom + Ti-dom = complete thinking brain. Gotta like that. Plus, there's Se in abundance to keep it real.

[Adam Strange]

Also, it could be other type too as in many cases you should type wrong. In most cases according to universal match <30%, even if you was not a novice and was sure about your own type.
But if you have >=3 random dudes of "same type" their traits (related by theory to types) may to be types related. Or your environment is a special case itself.

Have may look at examples of ESFJ in my lists. Do they drain energy or not as you've said in other thread.
"ESE: Warm and caring but tax my energy"
conflictors drain energy as vacuum cleaners, I suppose you could easily confound ESFJ and ESFP.
Similarily with ENFP
"IEE: Fun but drain away all my energy"
wich may be ESFP.
Then you may compare this trait with ESFP in lists.

Your current IR observations look as bullshit, hence either you had no enough examples to understand or typed many of them wrong. Several examples (better >=3 for every sex) you need to be sure in your impressions from concrete types.

And you can at last make normal video-interview wich fits my recommedations. It's not hard. This may help, if you'll not do another shit instead of typing video. To do something contradictory to what was asked is rather stupid, - you'll spend efforts but don't get what you made it for, while in other case you'll have rather more chance. If you'll do it, make a thread with the note in title about existence of the video in it.

Or you may continue to play with not much useful philosophizing on the forum, if you like the process itself. Ti types like it, I suppose.
As you think yourself INTJ, hence the problem is your "duals" don't give you impressions wich you await. Some other IR don't fit the theory good too. This may to be due your bad typing and hence incorrect examples, as I've said above. The most easy way for you to check your IR is to use my examples.

Wish you luck with your further useless reasonings, "not shitty" dude.

Hi, Sol.
Sometimes, videos are not needed. For example, the set of above statements sum to LSE.
I've seen SLI's and LSE's interact, and it is not always pretty. Check out any Clint Eastwood movie.

[Myst]

@Sol

Why on earth do you think that a type video is more reliable than any other ways of typing. You may very well conflate non-socionical factors into the vibes when typing by video. Especially as you clearly have no idea what exactly makes someone X type when you do your video typing. You yourself admitted that.

[Myst]

It could just be that the Te types I interacted with had other non socionics related issues. One of the LSEs I was around with was going to anger management and might have not been a good example of all LSEs. There must be serious problems when someone uses their demonstrative function against their duals. And yes, I am certain he was LSE and not SLE, Te and Si were very pronounced with strong delta values.

I can't say I've known any LIEs or ILIs very well, although I've gotten acquainted with some without issues.

Wait, is it Te as the information element that you don't like or people you typed as Te. Difference there.

[Sol]

muddy
To be sure in your type you need practice, but not collecting of unbased and doubtful hypotheses (wich may mislead you) and discussing them on forums. You already know everything you need and even bullshit you don't need. But it's good anyway to read normal Socionics book (at least, Filatova made one in English) and Jung's "PT" book, besides mess of articles on sites.
You may to use only your own practice and go longer or additionally use practice results of those like me who has experience noncomparably more than you. 2nd way is shorter. If you'll do so, then you may get noncontradicting to theory results of your type and people near you during several monthes. While to theorize and get results like "today I'm SLI, tomorrow LII" you may eternally.

[The Exception]

Also, it could be other type too as in many cases you should type wrong. In most cases according to universal match <30%, even if you was not a novice and was sure about your own type.
But if you have >=3 random dudes of "same type" their traits (related by theory to types) may to be types related. Or your environment is a special case itself.

Have may look at examples of ESFJ in my lists. Do they drain energy or not as you've said in other thread.
"ESE: Warm and caring but tax my energy"
conflictors drain energy as vacuum cleaners, I suppose you could easily confound ESFJ and ESFP.
Similarily with ENFP
"IEE: Fun but drain away all my energy"
wich may be ESFP.
Then you may compare this trait with ESFP in lists.

Your current IR observations look as bullshit, hence either you had no enough examples to understand or typed many of them wrong. Several examples (better >=3 for every sex) you need to be sure in your impressions from concrete types.

And you can at last make normal video-interview wich fits my recommedations. It's not hard. This may help, if you'll not do another shit instead of typing video. To do something contradictory to what was asked is rather stupid, - you'll spend efforts but don't get what you made it for, while in other case you'll have rather more chance. If you'll do it, make a thread with the note in title about existence of the video in it.

Or you may continue to play with not much useful philosophizing on the forum, if you like the process itself. Ti types like it, I suppose.
As you think yourself INTJ, hence the problem is your "duals" don't give you impressions wich you await. Some other IR don't fit the theory good too. This may to be due your bad typing and hence incorrect examples, as I've said above. The most easy way for you to check your IR is to use my examples.

Wish you luck with your further useless reasonings, "not shitty" dude.

Hey, give the guy a break. He's still relatively new to the theory.

[Muddy]

Well I just gave this a read:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ation-Elements

When I looked at the examples of speech I related a lot to the Ne ones, even more then the Ti ones. I can now say without a doubt I am Ne ego.

[Myst]

Well I just gave this a read:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ation-Elements

When I looked at the examples of speech I related a lot to the Ne ones, even more then the Ti ones. I can now say without a doubt I am an Ne ego.

This too? http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Ne

"Ne as creative function of LII (INTj; Robespierre) and EII (INFj; Dostoyevsky)"

[Muddy]

Yeah, its pretty clear I have strong and valued Ne. Its looks like there is a very good chance I am LII-Ne/LII-Creative. I seem to relate to Ne even more then Ti which brings up the possibliity of ILE but I am very introverted (at least socially) and show more IxTx traits. The Se statements were also the most painful to read.

[nondescript]

Yeah, its pretty clear I have strong and valued Ne. Its looks like there is a very good chance I am LII-Ne/LII-Creative. I seem to relate to Ne even more then Ti which brings up the possibliity of ILE but I am very introverted (at least socially) and show more IxTx traits. The Se statements were also the most painful to read.

As I already outlined, you can very well be a social intro and a cognitive extrovert. Nothing unusual there. I'll quote Carl now, so you can be completely certain of it:

"...; namely in the one case an outward movement of interest towards the object, and in the other a movement away ftom the object, towards the subject and his own psychological processes.

In the first case the object works like a magnet upon the tendencies of the subject; it is, therefore, an attraction that to a large extent determines the subject. It even alienates him from himself: His qualities may become so transformed, in the sense of assimilation to the object, that one could imagine the object to possess an extreme and even decisive significance to the subject. It might almost seem as though it were an absolute determination, a special purpose of life or fate that he should abandon himself wholly to the object.

But, in the latter case, the subject is and remains the centre of every interest. It looks, one might say, as though all the life energy were ultimately seeking the subject, thus offering a constant hindrance to any overpowering influence on the part of the object. It is as though energy were flowing away from the object, as if the subject were a magnet which would draw the object to itself.

It is not easy to characterise the contrasting relationship to the object in a way that is lucid and intelligible; ..."

If it wasn't obvious, the format is:

Overview
Cognitive extroversion
Cognitive introversion
Summary

So...which one of those suits you better?

[Myst]

Yeah, its pretty clear I have strong and valued Ne. Its looks like there is a very good chance I am LII-Ne/LII-Creative. I seem to relate to Ne even more then Ti which brings up the possibliity of ILE but I am very introverted (at least socially) and show more IxTx traits. The Se statements were also the most painful to read.

So at that link, do you relate to "Ne as leading function in ILE (ENTp; Don Quixote) and IEE (ENFp; Huxley)", more than to "Ne as creative function of LII (INTj; Robespierre) and EII (INFj; Dostoyevsky)" as per Golihov?

Anyway, strong creative/contact subtype can be like that. I also relate a lot to my creative function and thought SLE first... I would say Se does sound like your PoLR if it was the most painful one to even read.

[Muddy]

Well I rule out one option and then another takes it place.

I at least now I have it limited to the alpha NTs with Ti/Fe>Te/Fi and Ne/Si>Ni/Se. I relate more to Ne as a leading function but it is hard to decide if thats because it is my actually leading function or just because of subtypes. I feel like my Ti is more in service to my Ne. I have looked examples of other LII's post and they seem to speak in a different way from me, more structured and formal. If I were I ILE that might explain what I said before being more irrational then rational. I suffer from a lack of discipline and I find it very difficult to do boring work, I quit a couple of jobs already simply out of burnout and I get mad whenever someone presses me to do chores.

Regarding Se I seem to be able to use it when backed into a corner and have no other options back but it is not something I feel confident using and it leaves a foul taste in my mouth whenever I do. I could be Fi polr as much as Se polr, I get a very painful feeling whenever someone gives me a bad attitude. I was actually more extraverted at one point in time but became a lot more introverted after suffering a massive Fi (polr?) hit.

My social introversion may just be a result of being So-last and enneagram 5. Enneagram 5 sounds unusual for an ILE though.


Oh and I feel stupid asking this but, uhmm, how do you use the mention feature? @nondescript to be honest I'm having a hard time understanding what Jung is trying to say there. Sounds like that LII language I was just talking about.

Edit: Well it looks like I now know how to use the mention feature.

[Muddy]

I'd also like to note that my brother whom I live with is LSI so it might be possible I've unconsciously fallen into the habit of restraining my leading function so I don't hit his polr.

[nondescript]

I'd also like to note that my brother whom I live with is LSI so it might be possible I've unconsciously fallen into the habit of restraining my leading function so I don't hit his polr.

Just be what you are. Don't be a slave to other people. Live free woohoo!

Also, how couldn't you understand Jung? I found it perfectly understandable...

[Muddy]

Just be what you are. Don't be a slave to other people. Live free woohoo!

Also, how couldn't you understand Jung? I found it perfectly understandable...

Like what is "the object"? I assume he is talking about the person when he talks about "the subject". I haven't really gone deep into jung's work to know what he means when he says any of that.

[nondescript]

Like what is "the object"? I assume he is talking about the person when he talks about "the subject". I haven't really gone deep into jung's work to know what he means when he says any of that.

The object is anything outside a person. It is really simple. The subject is a person, yes.

[Muddy]

Well all I can say is that I do tend to assimilate with my TV/controller/keyboard when on the internet, my car while driving, the movies I watch, my airsoft gun and opponents while playing airsoft all without being very aware of myself. Is this what jung means by cognitive extraversion @nondescript?

[nondescript]

Well all I can say is that I do tend to assimilate with my TV/controller/keyboard when on the internet, my car while driving, the movies I watch, my airsoft gun and opponents while playing airsoft all without being very aware of myself. Is this what jung means by cognitive extraversion @nondescript?

Oh yeah. We are getting places. Any other tools, problems, calculations and other stuff you find yourself getting completely lost at? Like you're one with them? Like Eminem said "you better lose yourself in the music, in the moment you own it...". Hm? I am this far . from the type.

[Muddy]

Oh yeah. We are getting places. Any other tools, problems, calculations and other stuff you find yourself getting completely lost at? Like you're one with them? Like Eminem said "you better lose yourself in the music, in the moment you own it...". Hm? I am this far . from the type.

I always like forms of entertain that have a good atmosphere. When I play an immersive video game such as The Last of Us I feel as if I am the main character Joel. This extends to other games as well, when I play Bioshock I feel as if I am actually in rapture. When watching a movie I feel as if I'm am actually there with the people on screen. I often listen to music for hours a time and completely loose awareness of myself and everything else around me. If I'm playing something like dodgeball I focus only on the ball and the position of the other people.

[nondescript]

I always like forms of entertain that have a good atmosphere. When I play an immersive video game such as The Last of Us I feel as if I am the main character Joel. This extends to other games as well, when I play Bioshock I feel as if I am actually in rapture. I often listen to music for hours a time and completely loose awareness of myself and everything else around me. If I'm playing something like dodgeball I focus only on the ball and the position of the other people.

Non plus ultra. You are clearly cognitively extroverted. But really clearly. As I said, social introversion is more of a general psychology maybe even a psychiatric term. It does not concern us.

Welcome ILE.

[ghost of forum past]

This sounds almost like textbook Se PoLR, just saying. I relate to every word of this. Particularly the parts about poor tolerance towards bossiness and aggression.

Same here.

[Muddy]

I suppose assuming I was an introverted type was the culprit behind my troubles finding my type. This explains why I relate to alpha yet seem to identify as more of an irrational. The fact that I went through and considered as many types as I did is itself an example of Ne leading. I went through the ILE descriptions and everything seems to match, the only thing that through me off in the first place was mistaking social introversion for cognitive introversion. Reinin Dichotomies for ILE also seem to fit without problem. Thanks nondescript for helping clear things up.

[nondescript]

I suppose assuming I was an introverted type was the culprit behind my troubles finding my type. This explains why I relate to alpha yet seem to identify as more of an irrational. The fact that I went through and considered as many types as I did is itself an example of Ne leading. I went through the ILE descriptions and everything seems to match, the only thing that through me off in the first place was mistaking social introversion for cognitive introversion. Thanks nondescript for helping clear things up.

This is why everyone that wants to type(not necessarily those that want to get typed) should at least familiarise themselves with basic texts. Jung, Aušra, hell even Keirsey. Because it makes a deciding difference.

Plus, I often wonder how is it that Ti types don't catch what I am saying but then I am reminded that I am mostly speaking about behaviour, society etc and then it clicks in my head. To me, the difference between two introversions is obvious(as is the possibility and the following reality of a mixed type) and I consider them Ti details difference. Ah the difference of perspective <3 .

I mean, I have nothing against LII either, but you yourself quite clearly said that outside THINGS(not PEOPLE!) do draw you towards them. So...ILE what to say.

[Muddy]

I took a few more photos that I thought were a pretty good representation of me in my "normal" state, in case anyone wants further VI info.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tid=6147&stc=1
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tid=6148&stc=1
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tid=6149&stc=1

[Muddy]

I can relate 100% to the description of Se as a role function.

"The ILE finds it difficult to get himself to do uninteresting, tedious work simply out of responsibility. If he has to, he will acutely feel his own lack of discipline. Thus the ILE is more comfortable when he has a flexible schedule and is free to pursue whatever seems most interesting to him at the moment.
The ILE is typically only able to sustain short periods of strenuous activity.
ILEs are uninterested in forcing people to do things, and are not keen on those who impose their will on others, so they do not take well to direct commands. They often detest authority exercised in this way, and will often challenge abuses of power. When backed into a corner by an aggressive Se, the often harmless appearing ILE will immediately rise to meet the threat and strike it down with carefully crafted ease. The impact the ILE has on society is usually through his understanding of how the world works rather than a position of material influence. For example, an ILE might rather advise a person in power than hold an official position of high authority. He will only take such a position if it is necessary (and if no one else will do so)."

It looks like I am a functional extrovert with atypically withdrawn enneagram types and instinct stackings, much like @anndelise.

[Myst]

First off, sure, you could be ILE, I don't know you well but I kinda doubt it at this point. Thought you were Te ignoring, for one.

Yeah, its pretty clear I have strong and valued Ne. Its looks like there is a very good chance I am LII-Ne/LII-Creative. I seem to relate to Ne even more then Ti which brings up the possibliity of ILE but I am very introverted (at least socially) and show more IxTx traits. The Se statements were also the most painful to read.

Er, I would say that indicates PoLR rather clearly.

I can relate 100% to the description of Se as a role function.

And not Se as PoLR anymore? Would you contrast the two?

I suppose assuming I was an introverted type was the culprit behind my troubles finding my type. This explains why I relate to alpha yet seem to identify as more of an irrational. The fact that I went through and considered as many types as I did is itself an example of Ne leading. I went through the ILE descriptions and everything seems to match, the only thing that through me off in the first place was mistaking social introversion for cognitive introversion. Reinin Dichotomies for ILE also seem to fit without problem. Thanks nondescript for helping clear things up.

If you compare the descriptions for how ILE is using Ne and Ti vs how LII does it, what do you see?

How do you relate to Ne more than to Ti? Why do you feel Ti is more in service of Ne than the other way around? How are you more Irrational?

I have looked examples of other LII's post and they seem to speak in a different way from me, more structured and formal. If I were I ILE that might explain what I said before being more irrational then rational. I suffer from a lack of discipline and I find it very difficult to do boring work, I quit a couple of jobs already simply out of burnout and I get mad whenever someone presses me to do chores.

These can fit LII-Ne too. The real question is if your Ne is inert or contact function.

Regarding Se I seem to be able to use it when backed into a corner and have no other options back but it is not something I feel confident using and it leaves a foul taste in my mouth whenever I do. I could be Fi polr as much as Se polr, I get a very painful feeling whenever someone gives me a bad attitude. I was actually more extraverted at one point in time but became a lot more introverted after suffering a massive Fi (polr?) hit.

What were you like when you were "more extraverted"? Introverts can become more introverted too so this on its own stated in this generic way doesn't prove extraversion.

My social introversion may just be a result of being So-last and enneagram 5. Enneagram 5 sounds unusual for an ILE though.

It happened before. (ILE and 5)

Well all I can say is that I do tend to assimilate with my TV/controller/keyboard when on the internet, my car while driving, the movies I watch, my airsoft gun and opponents while playing airsoft all without being very aware of myself. Is this what jung means by cognitive extraversion @nondescript?

No. I can also do this myself. Are you sx first?

Oh yeah. We are getting places. Any other tools, problems, calculations and other stuff you find yourself getting completely lost at? Like you're one with them? Like Eminem said "you better lose yourself in the music, in the moment you own it...". Hm? I am this far . from the type.

Don't confuse extraversion with sx Or just generic "flow" feel due to having expertise in the topic.

[Muddy]

Here is an overview of where I'm at now @Myst. Through trial and error I have got myself down to the alpha NTs, but I am unsure whether I am LII with a heavy emphasis on Ne or a withdrawn ILE.

For LII there is the argument of me being an introvert in the traditional sense. I am also not quite as active with the outside world as it seems a typical ILE should be and my energy is pretty low most of the time, but I am unable to decide if that is because of socionic factors or because of enneagram. I am most likely sx/sp, definitely so last.

With Ti I definitely take pleasure in understanding how things work, but I'm skeptical about it being a leading function. I really don't care much at all for formal logic and overly complex systems that offer no pleasure. Math and its related subjects where rather boring to me even though was relatively good at them. I don't feel a need to structure information, just as long as its readable is good enough for me. I care much more about fulfilling my own desires then implementing some view into society. This is what I mean when I say a relate irrationality then rationality. I see things in relative terms rather then black and white and I just tend to go with the flow without worrying about much. I am also rather indecisive and have a distaste for work. I am more of a pleasure seeker then a devoted scholar, but at that same time I am a lot more conservative in how I do it then other Ne doms. I just stick to things like video games, movies and looking up interesting things online rather than going out partying. I gladly go traveling or other fun things when others provide the opportunity, I just don't feel very confident doing such things myself.

Is there any good way to determine whether my Ti or Ne is contact/inert?

[Myst]

Here is an overview of where I'm at now @Myst. Through trial and error I have got myself down to the alpha NTs, but I am unsure whether I am LII with a heavy emphasis on Ne or a withdrawn ILE.

For LII there is the argument of me being an introvert in the traditional sense. I am also not quite as active with the outside world as it seems a typical ILE should be and my energy is pretty low most of the time, but I am unable to decide if that is because of socionic factors or because of enneagram. I am most likely sx/sp, definitely so last.

With Ti I definitely take pleasure in understanding how things work, but I'm skeptical about it being a leading function. I really don't care much at all for formal logic and overly complex systems that offer no pleasure. Math and its related subjects where rather boring to me even though was relatively good at them. I don't feel a need to structure information, just as long as its readable is good enough for me. I care much more about fulfilling my own desires then implementing some view into society. This is what I mean when I say a relate irrationality then rationality. I see things in relative terms rather then black and white and I just tend to go with the flow without worrying about much. I am also rather indecisive and have a distaste for work. I am more of a pleasure seeker then a devoted scholar, but at that same time I am a lot more conservative in how I do it then other Ne doms. I just stick to things like video games, movies and looking up interesting things online rather than going out partying. I gladly go traveling or other fun things when others provide the opportunity, I just don't feel very confident doing such things myself.

Is there any good way to determine whether my Ti or Ne is contact/inert?

To that last line there, a relevant question from my previous post: If you compare the descriptions for how ILE is using Ne and Ti vs how LII does it, what do you see?

As for my other questions in that post, it's enough if you ponder them on your own. But I would like to hear a reply to this one.

Also.. Is it your Ti that is less changeable (inert) or your Ne? Which one do you take more seriously, Ti or Ne? Do you accept more help in Si or in Fe?


A few more comments.

Ti leading != formal logic.

Everyone cares about fulfilling their own desires. Irrationality is not about that, it's about how you go about it.

Not seeing things as black and white fits both Alpha NT's.


And, you still need to understand the IEs themselves and Model A functions, instead of going with these traits that have very loose correlations at best for typing..

PS: I don't feel like you supervise me like ILEs, Kindred can work better.

[nondescript]

To that last line there, a relevant question from my previous post: If you compare the descriptions for how ILE is using Ne and Ti vs how LII does it, what do you see?

As for my other questions in that post, it's enough if you ponder them on your own. But I would like to hear a reply to this one.

Also.. Is it your Ti that is less changeable (inert) or your Ne? Which one do you take more seriously, Ti or Ne? Do you accept more help in Si or in Fe?


A few more comments.

Ti leading != formal logic.

Everyone cares about fulfilling their own desires. Irrationality is not about that, it's about how you go about it.

Not seeing things as black and white fits both Alpha NT's.


And, you still need to understand the IEs themselves and Model A functions, instead of going with these traits that have very loose correlations at best for typing..

PS: I don't feel like you supervise me like ILEs, Kindred can work better.

If anything, Te is formal logic. Ti is like...personal understanding. And the ability to verbalise it.

I don't feel conflict like I'd have with ILE either. I feel like punching my conflictors. But then again, my status is most likely that of ESI, but I could always be a SEI and then it'd explain somethings. Or you could be LII.

[Myst]

If anything, Te is formal logic. Ti is like...personal understanding. And the ability to verbalise it.

I don't feel conflict like I'd have with ILE either. I feel like punching my conflictors. But then again, my status is most likely that of ESI, but I could always be a SEI and then it'd explain somethings. Or you could be LII.

That's a good point about formal logic though certainly it's related to Ti too. My stance towards formal logic is that it's something pre-installed for me and so I don't feel the need to focus on formal logic for its own sake, though sometimes delving in related topics can be interesting if it allows me to discover more (logical) concepts. Also when you are required to express your thoughts with the highest precision possible, it's going to look like formal logic a lot, though I do not focus on that aspect consciously. Beyond that, it does feel rather unnecessary.

Ah also about maths, I liked it for the same reasons (feel of stuff being pre-installed and discover deep logical concepts). Again, it's often taught via a Te approach which I would find boring, yeah. But it doesn't obscure the hidden Ti depth for me