tereg's thread

[tereg]

I want to branch the discussion from this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=20304 to start a tangential discussion about what is being discussed in consentingadult's post regarding his perception of me.

Well, I think it's difficult to explain why I don't perceive you as an IEE, because I very much think I use Ne in order to arrive at the conclusion, and Ne is a perceiving function, not a judging function, but lets give it a try anyway:

First we'll start with Ne, although you didn't ask about it. What is Ne? It is about perceiving connections between thing and the perception of possibilities. We must remind ourselves that the use of Ne is not unique to ILE's and IEE's, all types use Ne to some extent. What sets leading and creative Ne apart from other styles of Ne, is that more often than not, leading and creative Ne perceives connections between things and possibilities CORRECTLY, i.e. other types do Ne too, but arrive at wrong conclusions more often, or they tend to see a connection between things THAT ARE NOT THERE. And that is what I see you doing very frequently, but nowhere was it so obvious as that page you started a while ago on the wiki in which you gave examples of your own life and how well these related to things written in Rick's extended type description. When I was going over that account, at pretty much each example I thought to myself "No Tereg, you are seeing a connection that is not there! You are reading it in a Forer effect style."

Now I can't go over all things stated in that thread, because I can't give arguments why you are wrong. This is the nature of Ne: to perceive something and know intuitively if it is correct or not. The connections you created, are imho, wildly imaginative.

This begs an important question to myself: When I draw comparisons or make connections between things (which I believe I have done several times on this forum, not just in the wiki article -- think how many times I've said "This reminds me of..."), is it contrived in such a way that I'm just exercising a some internal desire to where it appears I might be consciously trying to overexert myself to find connections between things? How accurate am I when I draw my comparisons in the sense of not bending or not manipulating what I see to fit around what I perceive? How objective am I with these comparisons?

I would be extremely worried if I were using or seeing connections like grasping for straws -- trying to see something that's not there. This is not something new that someone has brought up, so this is quite troubling. I can clearly remember my dad correcting me when I would arrive at similarly-drawn conclusions and being chastised for it. Could it be that I've just been good enough here on the forums to draw conclusions in such a way that simultaneously I've sort of consciously held myself back from reaching unacceptable conclusions so as to reach and draw "safe" conclusions and appearing to others competent in these manners so as to suggest dominance?

Then how does Ne manifest itself in you? Well, I don't know you personally, but you seem to use Ne in a way I've come to know from leading Si types (clearly, you do value Ne), and particularly SEI's. Normally, Ne as a suggestive function is a privately used function, however, when leading Si types come into contact with leading Ne types, they let their restraint go and start using their Ne socially.

I find this to be an interesting point. If I am reading this correctly this is suggesting that my is let loose more naturally and openly in a social arenas (such as the forum, Stickam, or face-to-face diaglogue) if faced with leading types. So, I guess the question that would need to be asked is: When I am using in the social arena with non- leading types, does it come across differently? Is the suggestion then that non- leading, or even non- valuing types find my comparisons and conclusions a bit awkward and contrived? Say, Gamma. What are the characteristics of a Gamma receiving suggestive information? What do the Gammas here think, then, of conclusions and comparisons that I draw?

Now on Ti: from my perspective, many of your posts are about explaining things into a 'system'. IEE's, contrary to ILE's, do not advertise their 'systems' as loudly as you do, unless they are absolutely positive that they are right about them. Ti PoLR is a privately used function. Ti mobilizing, however, although weak in quality, can manifest itself strongly in quantity. All types use Ti to some extent, so you and I, whatever our types, do too. But similar to what I said an Ne, it's leading and creative Ti types that are more likely to arrive at correct systems (within the framework of their knowledge), where other types are less likely to come up with correct systems (even though their framework of knowledge is big enough to arrive at correct systems, so it's not the lack of knowledge that would be causing the incorrect systems). Your systems are, imho, very entertaining and cute, but they are simply not realistic.

So, I guess, again, I need to ask other here: Have the systems I have drawn for myself appeared too contrived or unrealistic for myself? What then is the difference between the Delta NF idealism and vision, and your perception of the systems I create for myself? Is it the case for me, in your view, that my maturity level and "framework of knowledge" is such that I can sort of mask this to others and arrive at realistic systems some of the time?

Functions do not exist in a vacuum, and we have to look at the relationship between Ne and Ti too. I think the way you use your super-ego block points out to ILE seeking.

Finally on Fe: I don't have a good argument for this, I can only say you seem to be a good natured guy, the style of your posts reminds me of the good naturedness of SEI's (as opposed to the manipulative emotionality of IEI's). Futhermore, there is an absence of Fi-style dramatism.

Could you elaborate on this? I'm not sure I quite understand how you perceive in its totality, or perceive dramatism. I don't want to think that you see dramatism simply as corresponding to

Well, all 'n' all not a very good argument, but it's the best I can do. Once more: I don't know you personally, but based on your contributions to this forum, I would say SEI. An SEI who behaves like he's in contact with leading Ne types.

There is a thing I'd like to ask: a while ago you wrote somewhere in a thread (which I can't find) something to the effect that you were frustrated about people not understanding some things that are hard to handle for you. I'm not sure, but if I recall correctly, it was your manager in a hamburger restaurant, but I might have mixed this up. Do you know what posts I'm talking about and where I can find it?

Hmm. This might actually be several things. Frustrated about people not understanding some things that were hard for me to handle. Oh you mean like I was struggling with something, didn't know how to deal with it, another person would try to console me, but they didn't quite understand how to help me (even though the genuinely wanted to help)? I wonder if you're referring to when I was working as a shift manager at Pizza Hut and feeling overwhelmed when things were out of control and out of my control and nothing anyone could say could lift me out of it because I felt like I still had failed or let the store down. Something like this? If not, in the more general sense as you have put it in the post, that can be literally dozens of other similar situations I've found myself in that I could also describe for you.

P.S.: as for the self-typing of other IEE's, I'm not convinced all self-acclaimed IEE's here are. In particular, I would like to stick to the people I've mentioned, because I have seen enough of them and all they have said was not only in agreement with what I consider to be IEE, but also there is a lack of things contradicting the IEE typing. They are in sync. Of all other self-acclaimed IEE's, I can only say that I have not seen very much that confirms they are IEE, but I have not seen anything that contradicts it either, so I'm taking a neutral stand on them. But not with Tereg: I do not see the IEE confirmed in him, but I do see it contradicted. Furthermore, I seen many people in real life taking an MBTI test and arriving at IEE, because that is how they saw themselves, not what they really were. My own girl friend (SEI) was an example of that: When I explained MBTI to her, she thought she was ENFP, but later she came out of Rick's test as ESE (well, she is a very social SEI).

fwiw, the last time I took the MBTI, I tested ISFJ. But that was about 4 or 5 years ago, and, I'm not honestly sure how accurate that was. But, I can say that I have never tested ENFP on the MBTI in my lifetime.