INTx and Strategic Thinking

[Rebelondeck]

.........you're underestimating the power of the creative function. I definitely agree that ILIs dwell on details obsessively, but an ILI, with creative Te, feels the need to use his knowledge for personal gain (gamma fixation). I assume that this drive decreases the more Ni-heavy the ILI is, but the secondary function certainly affects a personality more than I think you give it credit for. In the same way, an LII would plan and logically connect all the necessities, but they would be less averse to adaptation because of creative Ne...............

On average, a balanced ILI produces some form of output (using Te processes) 50% of the time. Regarding type definition, input (Ni) leads ILI information processing regardless of the amount of time that output (Te) operates so input priorities take precedent. ILIs can rationalize til the cows come home but all this extra time is likely applied to protecting their precious base of beliefs. A Te-sub-type is simply more thorough at defending its base but this doesn't make this person more LIE-like. LIIs usually hold a lot of reservation about their input processes so they often don't trust their senses or memory unlike ILIs who tend to be much more assured of what they absorb and know.

a.k.a. I/O

[Exodus]

I can easily see the difference, but that's hard to describe in writing.

Instead:

ILI's are extremely logical (Te) and are great future planners (Ni). They secretly want to rule the world from behind the curtain and often relentlessly and unceasingly collect education to do so. They like BMW's (Se-seeking). ILI's tend to think that other people are idiots (Fe-PoLR). Males tend to like party girls who can be sexually dominating (Se-seeking). (Victims).

SLI-Te's can also be very logical (Te), but they place a higher emphasis on physical comfort (Si) and and are attracted to frivolity (Ne-seeking), and they want to retreat from the world, not rule it (Fe-PoLR). They tend to collect material resources that will serve them in their old age (Si), which they think can't come soon enough. (Caregivers).
SLI's tend to think that their lives are terminally boring and live in fear that they will lead a life where nothing ever happens. Males tend to avoid women but they do like women who like to travel and who spring infantile surprises on them.

Both types can be perfectionists and both types can be pretty hard on themselves sometimes.

Just from your chosen name, @superflousman, I'd say you are more likely to be SLI than ILI. SLI's tend to think that the world is passing them by as they stand and watch, and that they are entirely superfluous to the world. It is their duals, the IEE's, who forcefully bring them into an exciting reality.

The first part is essentially on point, but how does the bolded part not describe Se seeking?

[Adam Strange]

The first part is essentially on point, but how does the bolded part not describe Se seeking?

@thehotelambush, I think of Se as sensing the external world and exerting personal force on it. I think of Si as sensing one’s internal world (comfort and health) and ensuring that one has the personal resources to maintain that health and comfort.

The difference could be illustrated by imagining the senses of a simple robot. The robot has Se sensors which monitor the outside world and Se actuators which exert force upon it. But it also has Si sensors which monitor its internal energy levels, temperature, function health, and subroutines which keep track of the external sources of energy and maintenance areas for rest and repair.

You can see the difference in the interests and actions of Se-doms and Si-doms. The former are interacting with the external world and the latter are taking care of their inner world.

Since Si-users focus so much on their own internal state of comfort, they tend to focus less on the external world, except where doing so would increase their personal comfort or health levels. Other than that, they tend to retreat from the hustle and bustle of the world. This means that once they have a certain level of comfort, they stop interacting.
They still see the world go by, but they aren’t naturally adept at mixing in with it the way Se-users are. This doesn’t mean that they don’t want to interact, but it means that they tend to fall into comfortable routines where nothing new ever happens. Thus, they seek novelty, but it has to be a safe (self-preserving) form of novelty. Not Se action, but rather Ne alternative possibilities.

IEE’s don’t actually force (Se) SLI’s to do something. They first and foremost keep at them to get them to focus on the external world, and once they have the SLI’s attention, they offer endless suggestions as to what they can do together. The SLI can then select something that sounds fun and interesting but is not too dangerous.


*EDIT*

After looking over what I just wrote, I see that this also applies to ILE’s and SEI’s. ILE’s offer endlessly new things to SEI’s, and SEI’s in turn offer health, indulgence, and appreciation to ILE’s.

And if there is one thing, only one thing, that an SLI wants, it is to be appreciated.

[FarDraft]

I considered the fact that my descriptions do sound like those of INTJ's in MBTI. It might be because I don't see a big difference between the descriptions in the two systems, and I might have a hard time seeing the Ni because I have Ni myself and kind of swim in it.

Yes, I actually do know a few ILI's in both business and academia who use their meticulous planning and knowledge for personal gain. Most are actually quite well-off. But the two I know in academia are not less motivated by personal gain because they are in academia. Rather, it is because one is probably an e9 and a genuinely nice guy who wants to teach, while the other is a computer systems manager for a college and wants to hide in the machine.
The differences between the ILI's whom I know seem to be based on enneagram rather than job descriptions. I think most of the ILI's I know are ILI-Te's. I think an ILI-Ni would spend most of his time dreaming and very little of his time doing.

Ah, ok. I knew enneagram made a difference (I noted it in one of my replies to this thread), but I wasn't certain how big the difference would be in comparison to the differences caused by subtypes. Many of them overlap, actually, which I think can make it difficult to discern between enneagram fixes and subtypes if we're not being careful. For example, 9s are naturally more focused on human connection (fear of loss), which could be seen as having heightened ethics, leading one to conclude that they are an Ni subtype. This may be the case (probably is most of the time), but motivations/fears need not affect cognition in the same way each time.

[FarDraft]

@FarDraft You've just nailed down my relationship with my LII cousin. He's often amazed by my feats of "analytical" thinking. He manages to confuse me on occasion with a riddle or a hypothetical problem, but then the way I eventually solve it and, because I love and respect him, drop all filters and actually voice out my thoughts as I do so, amazes him. He amazes me, in turn, in bringing up things in my analysis that I never dreamed of. I have failed to solve a few of his queries, at first, then he says something really out there from my perspective and then I well and fully get it. He has a good laugh, I kick myself metaphorically for not thinking of that aspect or catching that, in hindsight, obvious hint, then he states how he's surprised at how fast I got it after that little hint and lightly chastises me for being such a linear thinker then immediately praises me for being just so damn good, thorough, and quick about, well, being me.

I have been rather lucky in regards to my family I must say. Could be better, but a thing I have no power over could have turned out far worse than it has. Praise Jesus I was not born into an elite bloodline .



I will admit to this as an dominant ILI. It is both relaxing and almost involuntary that I lose myself in the void of thought and possibility. Even now, I dream of all the things I could potentially be doing, yet here I am. I must make a greater effort to do instead of dream as if I accomplish but a fraction of my dreams, well, I'll at least get a footnote within future mainstream history books. I mean, people like Asimov, Aldrin, and Tolkien will get at least that a century or two from now at the very least. They are all far greater than I'll ever be, but even a small fraction of their success is well and truly within my grasp. My instincts tell me so, and far be it for me to distrust my primary ability .

The only problem is as you said, the call of the dreamlands is very strong indeed for my kind. It is in fact a fun fantasy of mine. I have days where I'd rather just sleep and dream. Yet biology only lets ya get so far with that. Once more an artifact of Darwin. Dreams are fun and all, but they don't fill your stomach, kill predators, or end threats to your own power/survival...

Glad to see my interpretations aren't deluded. Also nice to see that you have a good relationship with your cousin and family in general. That's always good. I understand what you mean by your first paragraph. Many Ne-heavy LIIs always have some different way of looking at something that you could never have thought of. Ti LIIs are more linear, but they still have that scatter-brained aspect. I think ILIs have this too, to an extent, since Ni is a pretty strange function in and of itself. It's definitely less vocal, though.

Honestly, I think I'm Te subtype from a cognitive standpoint, but I'm also pretty inactive and lazy. I think through all the things I could do and plan proper time management but end up doing the same things I always do, which is to screw around here, reddit, or youtube. I'm always able to get my work done on time (somehow - maybe Stratiyevskaya was right), but there are a number of things I want to accomplish that I'm just not doing. I think a slow buildup is important for this kind of stuff. I've been forcing myself to exercise more and build good habits, which I've been keeping up with. I've also been reading and writing more. Some other steps are still called for, but it'll take time and effort until they do.

[FarDraft]

LII is far better at correctly identifying the optimal solution from far distance. ILI is far better at implementing profitable solutions at short distance.

LII struggles when the optimal path isn't clear and set themselves back by not making local progress. ILI has a tendency to ignore alternatives to their current plan, even when a far more suitable solution is possible, and can run into problems in this way.

Overall I think your analysis is fairly sound.

This makes sense, but could you elaborate on why you think LII is more long-distance and ILI more short-distance? Gulenko says the opposite since LIIs focus more on the various possibilities in the present and short-term (static) whereas ILIs flesh out an idea all the way into the far future, being more ignorant of alternative pathways (dynamic). The source is the reddit page I linked to in the OP.

[FarDraft]

On average, a balanced ILI produces some form of output (using Fe processes) 50% of the time. Regarding type definition, input (Ni) leads ILI information processing regardless of the amount of time that output (Te) operates so input priorities take precedent. ILIs can rationalize til the cows come home but all this extra time is likely applied to protecting their precious base of beliefs. A Te-sub-type is simply more thorough at defending its base but this doesn't make this person more LIE-like. LIIs usually hold a lot of reservation about their input processes so they often don't trust their senses or memory unlike ILIs who tend to be much more assured of what they absorb and know.

a.k.a. I/O

In your first sentence, do you mean Te rather than Fe?

But overall I get what you mean. The only thing I'd say is that most ILIs don't seem to have such a firm base set of beliefs because of the fact that they're Ni dominant, which never comes to conclusions (not a judging function). It tends to be Ji bases who are more stubborn, though Ne ignoring can definitely cause some problems for Ni bases as well.

I don't fully agree with this interpretation since the definition of being Te-sub is that you pay more attention to output than a normal ILI, but I get that your model pays particular attention to the dominant function.

[superflousman]

I can easily see the difference, but that's hard to describe in writing.

Instead:

ILI's are extremely logical (Te) and are great future planners (Ni). They secretly want to rule the world from behind the curtain and often relentlessly and unceasingly collect education to do so. They like BMW's (Se-seeking). ILI's tend to think that other people are idiots (Fe-PoLR). Males tend to like party girls who can be sexually dominating (Se-seeking). (Victims).

SLI-Te's can also be very logical (Te), but they place a higher emphasis on physical comfort (Si) and and are attracted to frivolity (Ne-seeking), and they want to retreat from the world, not rule it (Fe-PoLR). They tend to collect material resources that will serve them in their old age (Si), which they think can't come soon enough. (Caregivers).
SLI's tend to think that their lives are terminally boring and live in fear that they will lead a life where nothing ever happens. Males tend to avoid women but they do like women who like to travel and who spring infantile surprises on them.

Both types can be perfectionists and both types can be pretty hard on themselves sometimes.

Just from your chosen name, @superflousman, I'd say you are more likely to be SLI than ILI. SLI's tend to think that the world is passing them by as they stand and watch, and that they are entirely superfluous to the world. It is their duals, the IEE's, who forcefully bring them into an exciting reality. As in this clip:

Thanks for the response. I definitely relate to your description of Si and Ne. I do find myself or rather I prefer to be an obersever than a go-getter or doer. I believe many of my values and interests are indeed superfluous to the greater world.

This is also why I think Ni and Si are similar and perhaps I confused the two. Lot of descriptions characterize Ni as being passive, in the background, not really engaged which I related to. I consider myself an individualist, don't really care about political/civic duties, social pressures, religion, gossip, etc...What I like is enjoying my time through reading, surfing, being with family/friends, traveling and general leisure. It all comes down to healthy and humane living if I had had to state a theme.

[Rebelondeck]

In your first sentence, do you mean Te rather than Fe?.........

Yes, I did mean Te. Note that I wouldn't expect anyone on this site to agree with my interpretation; models based on information control systems is a bit too hard science........

a.k.a. I/O

[FarDraft]

Yes, I did mean Te. Note that I wouldn't expect anyone on this site to agree with my interpretation; models based on information control systems is a bit too hard science........

a.k.a. I/O

I disagree mainly because it seems to place too much emphasis on one function when in reality the other functions impact individual differences quite severely. However, I remember reading through your posts on your model and agreeing with many of the things you had to say. I guess I just disagree with the implementation of the system. That being said, it's been a while since I read those posts, so this is therefore very loosely said.

Honestly, I'd be willing to phrase IE usage in terms of information control sequences if that makes the explanations clearer or more useful.

[Exodus]

@thehotelambush, I think of Se as sensing the external world and exerting personal force on it. I think of Si as sensing one’s internal world (comfort and health) and ensuring that one has the personal resources to maintain that health and comfort.

The difference could be illustrated by imagining the senses of a simple robot. The robot has Se sensors which monitor the outside world and Se actuators which exert force upon it. But it also has Si sensors which monitor its internal energy levels, temperature, function health, and subroutines which keep track of the external sources of energy and maintenance areas for rest and repair.

You can see the difference in the interests and actions of Se-doms and Si-doms. The former are interacting with the external world and the latter are taking care of their inner world.

Since Si-users focus so much on their own internal state of comfort, they tend to focus less on the external world, except where doing so would increase their personal comfort or health levels. Other than that, they tend to retreat from the hustle and bustle of the world. This means that once they have a certain level of comfort, they stop interacting.
They still see the world go by, but they aren’t naturally adept at mixing in with it the way Se-users are. This doesn’t mean that they don’t want to interact, but it means that they tend to fall into comfortable routines where nothing new ever happens. Thus, they seek novelty, but it has to be a safe (self-preserving) form of novelty. Not Se action, but rather Ne alternative possibilities.

IEE’s don’t actually force (Se) SLI’s to do something. They first and foremost keep at them to get them to focus on the external world, and once they have the SLI’s attention, they offer endless suggestions as to what they can do together. The SLI can then select something that sounds fun and interesting but is not too dangerous.


*EDIT*

After looking over what I just wrote, I see that this also applies to ILE’s and SEI’s. ILE’s offer endlessly new things to SEI’s, and SEI’s in turn offer health, indulgence, and appreciation to ILE’s.

And if there is one thing, only one thing, that an SLI wants, it is to be appreciated.

Yeah but that wasn't my point. The point is that Ni is even more "internal" than Si and Ni leadings tend to be more reclusive than Si leadings, all other things being equal. Likewise "bringing them into an exciting reality" sounds just as much Se as it does Ne, if not more.

[Sol]

if by more strategic thinking to suppose longer time periods - base Ni types are more such. they may dream own life on all its lenght and how the process may be after centuries

if more detailed and clear planing - J-N types are more such. they have more realistic approch to planing. meanwhile do longer time plans than S types. the more stable and predictable situation is - the more effective J type will be

T and F is about what plans are. T - objective world planing, F - relations of people planing

from practical point, there should not be _significant_ difference in planning abbility on any time between any N types. except T/F, where T types better plan in logical regions and by logical methods. in case it's not olymplic games or there is a need in outstanding results

[FarDraft]

if by more strategic thinking to suppose longer time periods - base Ni types are more such. they may dream own life on all its lenght and how the process may be after centuries

if more detailed and clear planing - J-N types are more such. they have more realistic approch to planing. meanwhile do longer time plans than S types

T and F is about what plans are. T - objective world planing, F - relations of people planing

Why would an LII, who has Te ignoring and Se PoLR, have a more realistic plan than an ILI? Also, detailed, linear plans are more in the realm of NiTe rather than TiNe, which is more nonlinear.

[Sol]

Why would an LII, who has Te ignoring and Se PoLR, have a more realistic plan than an ILI?

It should be more realistic as J types relate more seriously to planing, what makes them as more rational and lesser dreamers. The plan appear as lesser accurate by the result, but it will be better designed and better explained from rational point, what implies better level of details. Base Ni do more abstract and lesser based planing as P types.

Te is strong at all T types and hence they deal good with it. To call strong function as "ignoring" is senseless. The term could be related to superego in stressed states, to weak and hence lesser conscious functions.
Se is nonvalued. Compared to ILI this means LII will think more about Si related as physical comfort and lesser about Se related as surface/secondary details of physical objects (which color will be a car to buy). But planning as a process relates to imagination and abstractions, - N. Which S is valued should not change the quality of a planing, in general.

When you'll understand correctly own type - you should understand better what the theory means and how it should be applied.

[FarDraft]

It should be more realistic as J types relate more seriously to planing, what makes them as more rational and lesser dreamers. The plan appear as lesser accurate by the result, but it will be better designed and better explained from rational point, what implies better level of details. Base Ni do more abstract and lesser based planing as P types.

Te is strong at all T types and hence they deal good with it. To call strong function as "ignoring" is senseless. The term could be related to superego in stressed states, to weak and hence lesser conscious functions.
Se is nonvalued. Compared to ILI this means LII will think more about Si related as physical comfort and lesser about Se related as surface/secondary details of physical objects (which color will be a car to buy). But planning as a process relates to imagination and abstractions, - N. Which S is valued should not change the quality of a planing, in general.

When you'll understand correctly own type - you should understand better what the theory means and how it should be applied.

Your analysis takes into consideration the dichotomies but not the functions, which is a problem since the functions are arguably the stronger method for determining type. For example, most EIIs aren't that realistic because of weak Te and PoLR Se. They're also prone to dreaming because of strong Ne and idealistic Fi. Their being rational means that they want to live a more structured life and have internal balance (Ij), not that they construct detailed plans on a regular basis. Also, you can't say that someone like an ESTp isn't realistic because they aren't a rational type, nor could you say that for an ISTp. It doesn't make sense. Realism mostly comes from strong sensing and Te with a preference for logic over ethics.

Moreover, ILIs, by pretty much all accounts, are the most detail oriented type do to NiTe valuing, Ne unvaluing, and process dichotomy fixation. You can't ignore all those facts in favour of their being a perceiving type - it's irrational.

Lastly, it makes perfect sense for a strong function to be ignored since it takes away time and energy from the dominant function, which is most valued. It's also clearly noticeable in people, where ILIs usually hate using Ne and LIIs usually hate using Te.

I don't claim to be an expert in socionics but your denying model A, Gulenko, and certain well analyzed Reinin dichotomies in favour of basic dichotomies makes no sense.

I should also add that the more I read into the system, the more I relate to the gamma quadra and ILI over LII. Literally nothing you have said convinces me otherwise. You'll have to try harder to prove to me that you're correct. If you want to, you can go and respond to the criticisms I had of your logic in the last post and really try to prove me wrong. If not, then I don't believe you, and you can't make me.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...58#post1315358
The response is located in this post. I'm sure you can find it.
I'll be honest, in reading it, I wish I had phrased some things better and explained some things more rigorously. But I won't adjust my response since it's your move.

[Rebelondeck]

I disagree mainly because it seems to place too much emphasis on one function when in reality the other functions impact individual differences quite severely........

There's a distinction between "emphasis on one function" and what process has ultimate control - the arbiter. A process may do less work than the other but only one process can set the direction - in order to maintain system (ego) stability. Sub-types do place more emphasis on either input or output but their process and priority structures are identical; thus, the approach that they take toward actual information processing has to the same. I am an extreme Ti-sub-type but my process for producing output is no different than Ne-sub-types. I may overthink (rationalization-wise) but in doing so, I overlook far too much information; sub-type simply indicates lack of system balance - and may be one aspect that's alterable.

a.k.a. I/O

[vesstheastralsilky]

Plausibly common sample Te v. Ti scenario

ILI: starts as a computer programmer at a corporation, writes code, later heads the accounting dept, later becomes CFO.

LII: starts as a research technology specialist, moves onto engineering project management, later invents a new method of rocket propulsion with a breakthrough in materials science.

[Number 9 large]

Strategic thinking involves vision and goalsetting/ rallying the resources to get to that vision.

Ne Ti is about incorporating new ideas into a conceptual framework.

So strategic thinking belongs to the gamma NTs

[Tallmo]

Why would an LII, who has Te ignoring and Se PoLR, have a more realistic plan than an ILI? Also, detailed, linear plans are more in the realm of NiTe rather than TiNe, which is more nonlinear.

LIIs are known to be pragmatic. The Se PoLR actually contributes to this. Instead of acting it out (Se) they make a pragmatic analysis. It is a way to compensate for the PoLR.

[Exodus]

Plausibly common sample Te v. Ti scenario

ILI: starts as a computer programmer at a corporation, writes code, later heads the accounting dept, later becomes CFO.

LII: starts as a research technology specialist, moves onto engineering project management, later invents a new method of rocket propulsion with a breakthrough in materials science.

In what world do computer programmers go into the accounting department??

[vesstheastralsilky]

In what world do computer programmers go into the accounting department??

That example was based on a real ILI I know. Retired very wealthy but was motivated to.play business games to get it like buying company shares then selling off etc.

[FarDraft]

LIIs are known to be pragmatic. The Se PoLR actually contributes to this. Instead of acting it out (Se) they make a pragmatic analysis. It is a way to compensate for the PoLR.

This seems off to me since the PoLR, by definition, is an area of weakness. Could you give a few more examples for how you think this would manifest in other types? For example, how would Fe PoLR affect an ILI or Ni PoLR an LSE?

[FarDraft]

Strategic thinking involves vision and goalsetting/ rallying the resources to get to that vision.

Ne Ti is about incorporating new ideas into a conceptual framework.

So strategic thinking belongs to the gamma NTs

This is pretty much the conclusion I've come down to as well. Obviously with more nuance in relation to time-scales and different situations, but this is the gist of it.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I disagree that it's easy to fake Fe, more like Fe can appear to be 'Fake' but that doesn't mean it's easy for anybody to fake.

When an ILI or LII tries to use Fe, it always feels like they are mocking it, or using it sarcastically- meaning they actually aren't using it well, and people can see right through it. The mocking tone can often feel like a defense mechanism that they are insecure about it, it's hitting a weak point. The LII gets away with this a bit more because they value Fe as opposed to not valuing it, but even when they do it you can sense the sarcasm in their voice when they use it.

LIEs with role Fe, 'fake Fe' much better, along with LSEs.

I don't mean to be a negative nancy here but just face the music that Fe is the ILI and LII weakness just like Te is my ultimate weakness.

[ouronis]

I like to develop solutions that make successful intervention or adaptation easy in the future. I find the differences between myself and people who think similarly to me revolve around breadth of concern and lack of planning for future adaptability.

In my mind, it is bad to design solutions that appear to be correct at the outset but cannot support any additional modifications without breaking the well-proportioned logic of the system. So to me, it is not about either/or when it comes to planning ahead or adapting on the fly, because both have their strengths. I wouldn't put this to type (at least within I/e t/f based groups) because these differences usually manifest because of a combination of your attitude towards your intellectual self and your educational background.

[FarDraft]

I disagree that it's easy to fake Fe, more like Fe can appear to be 'Fake' but that doesn't mean it's easy for anybody to fake.

When an ILI or LII tries to use Fe, it always feels like they are mocking it, or using it sarcastically- meaning they actually aren't using it well, and people can see right through it. The mocking tone can often feel like a defense mechanism that they are insecure about it, it's hitting a weak point. The LII gets away with this a bit more because they value Fe as opposed to not valuing it, but even when they do it you can sense the sarcasm in their voice when they use it.

LIEs with role Fe, 'fake Fe' much better, along with LSEs.

I don't mean to be a negative nancy here but just face the music that Fe is the ILI and LII weakness just like Te is my ultimate weakness.

You're correct, which is why I said it doesn't fool people for long. I dislike the idea that the PoLR is the ultimate weakness, though. Life circumstances require the development of every single function, so the idea of an "ultimate weakness" would be much more personal. The PoLR function is more like the function that you would only use as a last resort, and the function that you hate to see a lot of in others.

[vesstheastralsilky]

You're correct, which is why I said it doesn't fool people for long. I dislike the idea that the PoLR is the ultimate weakness, though. Life circumstances require the development of every single function, so the idea of an "ultimate weakness" would be much more personal. The PoLR function is more like the function that you would only use as a last resort, and the function that you hate to see a lot of in others.

Yeah I am not sure I like the idea of Fe being a weakness. I mean weak how? Just because a function isn't dominant in someone does not mean it isn't good enough. Perhaps I am sensitive to the pejorative implications here.

[WinnieW]

I doubt that any function is a general or permanent weakness, a function can be a weakness situationally or temporally, however.

[The Reality Denialist]

Weakness. Ummm... I think PoLR can be overwhelming personally while it can become more manageable inter personally.

[FarDraft]

Here is a summary of my thoughts so far.

Strengths

• LII: more rational and thus more likely to plan and make early decisions than ILI. Does not think as far ahead as ILI but structures short-term actions more effectively.
• ILI: less likely to plan but more likely to think further ahead than LII. Thinks, in detail, about likely prospects through a practical viewpoint but doesn't structure actions unless forced.

Weaknesses

• LII: may not look at things from a practical perspective, preventing their plan from being realistic. May also settle too early, missing too many small details or important pieces of information that arise over time.
• ILI: tunnel vision (Ne ignoring) can occur from not considering enough perspectives on how things could play out. Could forecast too much into something that is built upon a faulty assumption, which leads the entire idea to fail.

EDIT: Removed a bunch of stuff since I think the analysis was dumb.

[Alomoes]

Well, hold on, I have an answer. Don't know if it's right. Strategic though can be done differently. For example, one person will look over all the choices, and then pick the best one, while the other will just fumble around with platitudes. As an example, I like my platitudes. If I outproduce the enemy, I will win. *Proceeds to get killed in micro.* >> Litterally every SupCom game I play. Well, that and my terrible offensive strategy, which amounts to throwing all my forces at one enemy, sitting there, waiting for reinforcements while my force gets attritioned, then proceeding to get donked on at my base. Sending troops in waves is not good, but it's either that or sending them in a wave, and then reinforcing in piecemeal, which means the troops will be more vulnerable to encirclement. The obvious solution is to make transports, but that's expensive and risky, because then I'll need adequate air superiority.

Compare Quill18's spreadsheets for playing Civ games.

[FarDraft]

LII is far better at correctly identifying the optimal solution from far distance. ILI is far better at implementing profitable solutions at short distance.

LII struggles when the optimal path isn't clear and set themselves back by not making local progress. ILI has a tendency to ignore alternatives to their current plan, even when a far more suitable solution is possible, and can run into problems in this way.

Overall I think your analysis is fairly sound.

What exactly do you mean by "identifying the optimal solution" and "implementing profitable solutions"? Do you mean that LIIs are able to see where things are headed in the long term and thus are able to determine the best way of achieving their goals whereas ILIs are better able to construct a tactical plan to achieve profit in the short term?

If that's the case, then I'm not sure I agree. Most of the literature I've read don't place a time-limit on the ILI's foresight and don't claim that they're the best at short-term planning. E.g. Filatova writes

The consciousness of ILI easily encompasses any periods in time and perceives the world comprehensively and systematically, and all the processes occurring within it dynamically. His ability to freely traverse the time axis allows him to see distant prospects, and consequently few can match him in the realm of strategic forecasts.

(http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ion-(Filatova)). However, if we interpret this quote,

The LII knows wonderfully well how to estimate his own possibilities and capabilities. If suitable conditions for the application of his abilities aren't present, and there is no possibility to influence them (no foreseeable revolutions coming in the near future), the LII waits for more favorable circumstances, or tries to adapt his own personal abilities and possibilities to the existing objective conditions. In any event, the LII usually doesn't allow himself to complain on the topic of his own back luck and lack of success, although he might envy the unfair, in his view, success of another person.

as the LII being able to determine the optimal solution in the long-term due to measuring his own potential well, then I guess I could agree with the LII idea.