I think you may find that people across many types don't enjoy conflict, so they may try to avoid it. Even Se base types when they decide enough is enough and it's time to hang the helmet up and retire.Originally Posted by Sol
How in your experience does Se manifest in ESI-E9? Like I said, it's best to keep the two typologies separate for now, find one type at a time, but you appear as though you may be persistent for it, and yes, the sharing of the information can therefore only help now.
Well it just mean that focus is somewhere else.vs
look at where they stand. Pretty different reality.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Well it just mean that focus is somewhere else.
^ Drawing shapes in the clouds in the sky.
I think you are either Fi/Ni or Ni/Fi. Double introverted dominant. Double trouble
Some people seem to have a problem with Se and force/assertiveness.
When something is in the creative position it is A LOT different than in the base position. Creative works under the base.
I've known lots of ESIs and almost all of them are similar to Reverie. There is absolutely no problem here.
What you commonly see in ESI is natural assertion of Fi-attitude in the environment. They can make up their mind about what somebody is or what the relationship is and then they stick to that till the end no matter what. But they don't notice this themselves. Because that's just "how things are".
My own mother is ESI. She hates conflict, can't stand it. She doesn't assert herself physically, but she will assert her attitude no matter what. Not in a striking way, but it's like a mental wall, impossible to break through under normal conditions.
The positive side of it is that ESIs can become cornerstones for security or conservation of values.
Don't get stuck in the socionics myth about Se and force. It is kindof true, but only as a hint.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
people dont realize it but this is precisely Se in action
I think you just take for granted your level of Se and since its not couched in harsh language people assume it doesn't exist
for the people that don't value Se and logical ego, they're probably looking at this conversation and wondering wtf is happening, because you're essentially just applying ethical leverage to get the response you want
it probably seems really baffling like something is going on they cant see
that said, if you want to throw in with the wacey/chains/olimpia/singu crowd, you should totally go for it
i would say this is actually a textbook case of Fi Se over the usually Fe Si we get here
For sure. How does this apply to rev specifically? I have not read anything she wrote that would indicate this is the case for HER?
I don't think you're being manipulative, I think you're just imposing your will on those people, which is good. Those people need a ringleader. you're like the gamma manchurian. I hope you stick around and don't disappear once the IEI or EII is confirmed (this is the problem, especially with objectivist types, with getting a meaningless type, and if theyre not intrinsically motivated to continue searching, they lose all interest and chalk the whole thing up as bogus), and do some good here
If Si is about interpreting the environment internally and Se is about interpreting the environment externally, how then can an Se type do this without applying their judging function without some kind of force? Fi gamma types are good at getting what they want through external pressure of their ethics, or in an SEE case, modifying their ethics situationally to interpret the external environment.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but there has to be some kind of force or pressure for it to be Se, otherwise Ashura's definition of it is wrong, and how confusing will that end up?
I think what you are describing might be their Ni valuing, and weak Ne, without a natural inclination to external possibilites, but who knows.
She IS applying force though. Look at every comment saying she's ESI and she marked it as constructive. Now look at every comment implying she's EII and she ''liked'' it. That is already a manipulation of the results she's gonna get.
Maybe she just liked that people were putting other ideas forward more, or maybe those comments were worded in such a way that were constructive, or other comments were worded in such a way that reverie likes them. Some comments are likeable, others might not be so likeable, but they are constructive based on their input, or maybe reverie is showing her support for other ideas, so marking them as constructive.
I've no idea, I haven't looked into it as deeply as that. Interesting.
there's definitely force here, its force in the way theres Se everywhere, just much of the socion is totally oblivious to those dynamics. when people say "I'm not seeing the Se" its like duh
I don't think it even has to be as concrete as likes/dislikes (although there may be something to that) its more like "how you set yourself up"--its about the overall array of things. its how Ni can look at it and see where things are going and Se can look at it and achieve a near objective, decisively, over any resistance. Ni is just thinking chess not checkers. strategy v tactics in general. however I'm not saying one is better than the other, because its that entire idea that leads to all these types mistyping into Ni to begin with and transforming Se such that we end up in situations like this to begin with
My arguments were your art taste and impressions from your nonverbal. While people IRL have no idea about types to understand good where to look, may to know you not good enough, may to have no Te types to honestly understand the reality itself, while their casual understanding of terms may be easily misleaded by non-types factors like your emotional issues, enneagram type, etc.
Maritsa is not EII, but most probably EIE.
I think it was like my, no shit, second post here I said no way could maritsa be EII, so lets not act like that was somehow accepted by everyone
2013 wants its battle type back.
Yeah there is a new ulitmate EII in town. Move over maritsa, bertrand is here.
Bertie is ESI too. Haha
John-Updike-002.jpg
pushed her bitch ass out with my superior Se
What does Updike have to do here?
ya not enough room for two EIE around here.
From the 1st moment I've seen her video with that terrible (for me) nonverbal I said like "No way she's my dual" and then her conflicting whining kept me sure in my opinion.
The arguments I remember for Maritsa to be EII were like:
"oh. she's human. how you can be so rude to insist her type is other"
"she knows better what her type is!"
Well since you feel so strongly about it, it must be true.
You have missed all the light, calm and airy images she has posted over the years. Way more of them than what you are perceiving as "dark". I really don't find her taste in art dark but maybe because mine is much darker. I believe she also had a pinterest account at one point that would make you rethink all you said about her taste in art reflecting her type.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Se is in marking so many posts as liking/constractive.If this is Se, I plead guilty.
It's hard and monotonous manual work which only S types may do.
she's mostly typical EIE, annoying for Te types
That would be if you are coming from a paradigm where you can predict/ discern what motivates people's choice to mark a post. Seeing more than is really there has traditionally been the purvue of IEE/EIIs---> hidden meanings, motivational actions, the potential reason a post is marked b
I can discern her motives based on the description of the buttons. ''Liking'' a post means you enjoy reading it. Marking a post as constructive is usually done when you are either ambivalent or aversive to the information in the post.
it doesn't even matter what the motive is, Se is that it happened anyway
the point is people are o b l i v i o u s
I'd like to hear where people are seeing gamma because I don't see a single sign of it anywhere, but I'm open to hearing why
if anything I think reverie feels backed into a corner with all the relatively declarative approaches some members are taking in typing her, which is just in their respective style, but I think it might be overwhelming given the pace of the thread. this happens on every thread because that's just how forums work, but maybe it's best if we take it easy for a little while so she has time to construct responses at a pace she deems comfortable. I wrote a post but I'll hold back on it until the pace of the thread has stabilized. it's probably not the ideal typing, but I did try to provide better rationale this time around.
the whole dealio with the selective thanking/"constructive"-marking could be better analyzed by looking at the "why" than the "what" methinks
Reverie: the true Master of Puppets.Clever
Yeah, you could say that is being manipulative. I told you all I have my biases from the start.
But if someone were to just say plainly, I think you are EII, I would just mark it as constructive.
If I feel insulted by something sometimes I will not mark as constructive or like it. Not always. Sometimes I forget or think I'm liking too much of their stuff and feel like a weirdo.
Most of the ones that said I was EII I thought also included something nice or funny in them so I liked it.
I marked the ones that said ESI because there were things I didn't consider about myself or I was confused why they were seeing what they did but found it constructive. Some were just genuinely constructive.
I liked yours because you said that I liked the ones that were typing me EII, so I did the opposite.
If this is Se, I plead guilty.
I see weird depressive avatars and mostly remember such. Avatars better represent the person, so they are enough to decide.
> I really don't find her taste in art dark but maybe because mine is much darker.
As LSE I'm the main judge here about her taste to claim to be EII.Her taste is alien for me.
> I believe she also had a pinterest account at one point that would make you rethink all you said about her taste in art reflecting her type.
I saw her pin's collection and know not everything is dark there. But avatars mean more.
Just come on over to the dark side @reverie
Accept your fate. Delta doesn't want you and Alpha is afraid you will take over. That leaves Gamma and Beta.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
woah, reverie is the one backing people into the corner here, lets not get it twistedI think reverie feels backed into a corner
implicit in your post is the idea that Se is bad, and reverie is not bad, therefore she can't be using Se
my post is not assigning blame to reverie, which is why your post which takes on the tone of a rescuer, is misguided
its your implicit assumption that Se might be bad, and reverie would be bad if she were guilty of employing Se tactics (and its the other people that are bad!), that leads to mistyping because it creates a disincentive to be honest with oneself by morally loading the functions
Then according to your definitions of the words, sure. No doubt you would see it that way. The world is what we make it---->
Different people use the button functions in different unique ways. One person's tomAYto is another's tomAHto. This was the topic of a thread sometime back.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Delta wants, but only her best the leading function part.
we love aylen
smh bertrand
if that were correct then you'd quote the part where that implication was made in order to solidify your critique, but then you may not have a critique.
@reverie,
blackberry is a female ESI forumite. Amoung a small handful of others. To answer your question.
I once called her the queen bee ESI around here in what I thought was jest. She simultaneously shut that shit down and shamed me with a 5 word sentence I will not utter (cant remember, only remember the ethical power)
Se is in marking so many posts as liking/constractive.
It's hard and monotonous manual work which only S types may do.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
