EII-SLE Conflict Relations (INFj & ESTp)

[Lobo]

Blaze Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sereno, what do you think is so bad about beta? and while you're at it, what's so bad about delta?

It's hard for me to actually write something that is "universally true" about betas or deltas, since there's so many annoying factors. The only thing that I can offer are my general perceptions about their interactions, etc. I find it condescending and disgusting to say that "awww, betas are so misunderstood" and be all "fair" about things, which really is bullshit... I'm just writing what I have seen. I will probably not make this as detailed as I would want it because of laziness.


First of all, not all ESTps are my enemies. In fact, I know a pretty "holy" and saint-like ESTp who I can get along with when mingling. (She does seem a little naughty though ). My conflict with them can be summarized by - polrs and - accidental (or intentional) put-down. I find that both types seem to underestimate their polrs, and all hell breaks lose. Add this to the fact that imo we INFj's and ESTp's can be the most apt at manipulation of all the types, which is a cause of conflict because we don't really have control over the other. I know it sounds pretty bad, but that's the truth between me and them. I see "truths", societal thinking, among other things, to be inconcrete, and as such, can be potentially changed and altered. It's all about the mind game. However, I don't agree in doing this, and choose not to, since I do think it's evil. Some ESTps I find are incredible in manipulating, and therefore, exposing the "real" side of some people. People who are proud are the easiest to manipulate, and ESTps know this, and use it to their advantage by succesfully sucking up to them and saying how awesome they are, etc, and then getting what they want from them in the end. I don't agree in how they make people look like fools, but it is an ideological conflict. In my case, I have chosen (and probably still sometimes) to portray naivety and simple-mindedness, in order to not intimidate other people or make them feel inferior to me, which is definitely not true. I don't really care if someone thinks I am dumb, since they should know better than to underestimate the capacity of others. An INFj reason for manipulation is to achieve something is thought of as being "good".

Well, I'm tired. I know that this might all sound really bad, which to me it does, but I do think it's the shameful truth. However, I'm not like that irl .

[Megan]

Sereno, I honestly believe that you are one of the surest examples of a socionics I(N)Fj that I have seen here. Nothing to do with this topic but do you know what MBTI type you are?

[Christy B]

Blaze Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sereno, what do you think is so bad about beta? and while you're at it, what's so bad about delta?

It's hard for me to actually write something that is "universally true" about betas or deltas, since there's so many annoying factors. The only thing that I can offer are my general perceptions about their interactions, etc. I find it condescending and disgusting to say that "awww, betas are so misunderstood" and be all "fair" about things, which really is bullshit... I'm just writing what I have seen. I will probably not make this as detailed as I would want it because of laziness.


First of all, not all ESTps are my enemies. In fact, I know a pretty "holy" and saint-like ESTp who I can get along with when mingling. (She does seem a little naughty though ). My conflict with them can be summarized by - polrs and - accidental (or intentional) put-down. I find that both types seem to underestimate their polrs, and all hell breaks lose. Add this to the fact that imo we INFj's and ESTp's can be the most apt at manipulation of all the types, which is a cause of conflict because we don't really have control over the other. I know it sounds pretty bad, but that's the truth between me and them. I see "truths", societal thinking, among other things, to be inconcrete, and as such, can be potentially changed and altered. It's all about the mind game. However, I don't agree in doing this, and choose not to, since I do think it's evil. Some ESTps I find are incredible in manipulating, and therefore, exposing the "real" side of some people. People who are proud are the easiest to manipulate, and ESTps know this, and use it to their advantage by succesfully sucking up to them and saying how awesome they are, etc, and then getting what they want from them in the end. I don't agree in how they make people look like fools, but it is an ideological conflict. In my case, I have chosen (and probably still sometimes) to portray naivety and simple-mindedness, in order to not intimidate other people or make them feel inferior to me, which is definitely not true. I don't really care if someone thinks I am dumb, since they should know better than to underestimate the capacity of others. An INFj reason for manipulation is to achieve something is thought of as being "good".

Well, I'm tired. I know that this might all sound really bad, which to me it does, but I do think it's the shameful truth. However, I'm not like that irl .

Hmm. This is really interesting, and I think you are right. Hadn't thought of infj as a manipulator, but they can do this of they want.

[Christy B]

I am infj and relate to having to leave the house when I am in a difficult relationship with the people I am living with. I feel physically ill to stay around when there is that kind of tension. I do know however that this is not the way to deal with it since this does not let you be comfortable and makes you resent that other person that you feel is causing the distress.

I think you should try to be less hard on yourself. Although he is still under 18 and your son, he is an individual and no matter what you do he will make his own choices. Just try and understand where he is coming from and why. I do not know the details of this situation, but it seems that you need to try and relax, and stop being the one to make changes to accomidate him. Being caring and understanding does not mean being a pushover.

Like others have said this kind of thing can happen with any parent /teenager relationship regardless of type, so maybe not estp/infj related. If you could explain in more detail how your relationship problems relate to type we can maye help better.

Good luck!

[Blaze]

Blaze Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sereno, what do you think is so bad about beta? and while you're at it, what's so bad about delta?

It's hard for me to actually write something that is "universally true" about betas or deltas, since there's so many annoying factors. The only thing that I can offer are my general perceptions about their interactions, etc. I find it condescending and disgusting to say that "awww, betas are so misunderstood" and be all "fair" about things, which really is bullshit... I'm just writing what I have seen. I will probably not make this as detailed as I would want it because of laziness.


First of all, not all ESTps are my enemies. In fact, I know a pretty "holy" and saint-like ESTp who I can get along with when mingling. (She does seem a little naughty though ). My conflict with them can be summarized by - polrs and - accidental (or intentional) put-down. I find that both types seem to underestimate their polrs, and all hell breaks lose. Add this to the fact that imo we INFj's and ESTp's can be the most apt at manipulation of all the types, which is a cause of conflict because we don't really have control over the other. I know it sounds pretty bad, but that's the truth between me and them. I see "truths", societal thinking, among other things, to be inconcrete, and as such, can be potentially changed and altered. It's all about the mind game. However, I don't agree in doing this, and choose not to, since I do think it's evil. Some ESTps I find are incredible in manipulating, and therefore, exposing the "real" side of some people. People who are proud are the easiest to manipulate, and ESTps know this, and use it to their advantage by succesfully sucking up to them and saying how awesome they are, etc, and then getting what they want from them in the end. I don't agree in how they make people look like fools, but it is an ideological conflict. In my case, I have chosen (and probably still sometimes) to portray naivety and simple-mindedness, in order to not intimidate other people or make them feel inferior to me, which is definitely not true. I don't really care if someone thinks I am dumb, since they should know better than to underestimate the capacity of others. An INFj reason for manipulation is to achieve something is thought of as being "good".

Well, I'm tired. I know that this might all sound really bad, which to me it does, but I do think it's the shameful truth. However, I'm not like that irl .

good summary. it almost exactly describes the interactions between my infj father and estp ex husband. i'd add that estps identify people's power, lack thereof, and self centered needs and desires. he bonds with such individuals on these issues, then uses people to advance his goals. estp expects others to be evil, dark, and self centered. he capitalizes on this, overlooking the bad and trying to at least get something out of said individuals for his own gain. by tacitly accepting others wildness and self centered intentions, he minimizes the press on the Fi polr, his own questionable ethics.

infj at least my father (one could make an argument for his level of personality-disordered-ness, but i won't go there) will seek in a subtle way to draw people's attention to their own "dark side", thus, by way of ethics, getting people to want to behave better, ethically that is, from the infj point of view. a motivator for infj is for people to restrain their inner wild impulses and behave in accordance with a higher calling. truly, this is about getting other people to not press on the Se polr of infj.

so from my alpha point of view, being able to kind of see both sides, both individuals are motivated by their polr and can be manipulative, albeit in different ways.

[Danielle]

I liked that post Sereno. Really got me thinking. It's funny, you're right, total manipulator over here. But I usually don't see it that way, really I don't. I honestly don't have too many conflicts with ESTps, but I've also never spent a lot of time around any. From afar, I feel like I see right through them, and they are totally manipulative, and they get pleasure out of it, and they hurt people to fulfill their own ends, and they like to act mean and nasty, and people love them for it, which drives me mad when I let it get to me. When I'm feeling generous, I will say they can have a certain childlike appeal. But even their bloated jokes get on my nerves. They so big and bad but not to me.

But I am a manipulator too, and equally as good at it. It's just my way wouldn't work on them, and vice versa. A few months ago I had a sudden realization, and it scared me: Most people believe what I say, and do what I want. People believe what I tell them, and that's scary. The only thing that saves me: I'm telling them for good reasons! Exactly what you said. I just don't even see it as manipulating but it is: getting people to do what you think they ought to do. But I say, they ought to do it for their own good! And I am so sweet and simple, really, it's hard to resist me. Man that's kind of scary but since nothing will change no use being scared.

Oh, topic. Well, I admire INFps and ENFjs. They're Beta right? I admire them because.....ENFjs seriously have a respectable level of ambition and get-to-the-top spirit. I don't have it at all, but they take on so much pressure and fight so many obstacles it's really something, even if I personally think that in the end there's an emptiness there. But somebody's gotta do it and they do. INFps can be rather pushy, but in a good way. Like mentors or daring creatives.

The other two Beta types take risks and that's admirable. I like ISTjs in movies.

[Lobo]

Megan Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:36 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sereno, I honestly believe that you are one of the surest examples of a socionics I(N)Fj that I have seen here. Nothing to do with this topic but do you know what MBTI type you are?

I don't know what subtype I would fall into, or the definition of the classification. I had thought that my inclination was towards Fi, but, who knows... Also, I don't think that it would really make any difference for me actually. Btw, my MBTI type is INFJ as well.

Blaze Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:04 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sereno wrote:
Quote:
Blaze Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

good summary. it almost exactly describes the interactions between my infj father and estp ex husband. i'd add that estps identify people's power, lack thereof, and self centered needs and desires. he bonds with such individuals on these issues, then uses people to advance his goals. estp expects others to be evil, dark, and self centered. he capitalizes on this, overlooking the bad and trying to at least get something out of said individuals for his own gain. by tacitly accepting others wildness and self centered intentions, he minimizes the press on the Fi polr, his own questionable ethics.

infj at least my father (one could make an argument for his level of personality-disordered-ness, but i won't go there) will seek in a subtle way to draw people's attention to their own "dark side", thus, by way of ethics, getting people to want to behave better, ethically that is, from the infj point of view. a motivator for infj is for people to restrain their inner wild impulses and behave in accordance with a higher calling. truly, this is about getting other people to not press on the Se polr of infj.

so from my alpha point of view, being able to kind of see both sides, both individuals are motivated by their polr and can be manipulative, albeit in different ways.

That is true. I believe that with time and experience, one becomes less afraid and understanding of the polr, to the eventual point that your main function becomes "pure" as when you were young. I am interested in understanding Se as well in this purified form, not used in self-defense or in a negative way.

Danielle Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 1:38 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I liked that post Sereno. Really got me thinking. It's funny, you're right, total manipulator over here. But I usually don't see it that way, really I don't. I honestly don't have too many conflicts with ESTps, but I've also never spent a lot of time around any. From afar, I feel like I see right through them, and they are totally manipulative, and they get pleasure out of it, and they hurt people to fulfill their own ends, and they like to act mean and nasty, and people love them for it, which drives me mad when I let it get to me. When I'm feeling generous, I will say they can have a certain childlike appeal. But even their bloated jokes get on my nerves. They so big and bad but not to me.

But I am a manipulator too, and equally as good at it. It's just my way wouldn't work on them, and vice versa. A few months ago I had a sudden realization, and it scared me: Most people believe what I say, and do what I want. People believe what I tell them, and that's scary. The only thing that saves me: I'm telling them for good reasons! Exactly what you said. I just don't even see it as manipulating but it is: getting people to do what you think they ought to do. But I say, they ought to do it for their own good! And I am so sweet and simple, really, it's hard to resist me. Man that's kind of scary but since nothing will change no use being scared.

Oh, topic. Well, I admire INFps and ENFjs. They're Beta right? I admire them because.....ENFjs seriously have a respectable level of ambition and get-to-the-top spirit. I don't have it at all, but they take on so much pressure and fight so many obstacles it's really something, even if I personally think that in the end there's an emptiness there. But somebody's gotta do it and they do. INFps can be rather pushy, but in a good way. Like mentors or daring creatives.

The other two Beta types take risks and that's admirable. I like ISTjs in movies.

What I think is that the philosophical concept of utilitarianism originated from a Betian. It is such a logical concept, yet it disregards the individual with the ends justifying any means. That might be the reasoning for their actions, but I'm not sure. In essence, that is probably the reason that I, and probably all of the delta quadra, will always disagree with Beta.

[munenori2]

Actually, I'm pretty sure that one of the most prominent founders of utilitarianism, J.S. Mill, wasn't beta at all. He was one of the first supporters of the earliest feminist movement and had a nervous breakdown at age 20 because he felt his emotional life had been completely suppressed. I'm not citing this as clear cut evidence that he couldn't be beta (ISTj seems possible), but that wouldn't be my first impression. Though I could see how his father might have been beta. When his son was born, he wanted to turn him into something like a logical automaton to carry on the fight for utilitarianism. Maybe that's not really beta either though, maybe that's just insane.

[Lobo]

munenori2 Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:52 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I'm pretty sure that one of the most prominent founders of utilitarianism, J.S. Mill, wasn't beta at all. He was one of the first supporters of the earliest feminist movement and had a nervous breakdown at age 20 because he felt his emotional life had been completely suppressed. I'm not citing this as clear cut evidence that he couldn't be beta (ISTj seems possible), but that wouldn't be my first impression. Though I could see how his father might have been beta. When his son was born, he wanted to turn him into something like a logical automaton to carry on the fight for utilitarianism. Maybe that's not really beta either though, maybe that's just insane.

You might be right, it's been a long time since I studied ethics. Then I guess that the concept of utilitarianism is what I associate with beta.

Megan Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:56 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sereno wrote:

I don't know what subtype I would fall into, or the definition of the classification. I had thought that my inclination was towards Fi, but, who knows... Also, I don't think that it would really make any difference for me actually. Btw, my MBTI type is INFJ as well.


I would not have guessed MBTI INFJ for you for some reason but back to socionics. You do not come across like a Fi INFj, they usually are rather "softer" and less "aggressive", much like poster Minde. I(N)Fjs can sometimes (not in all cases) come across as overly and maybe even inapropriately forceful without realising it, perhaps for them it is related to what you have mentioned down below like underestimating their capacity to use a form of or something. Polrs are interesting.

Sereno wrote:
is something that needs developing in my case. However, I seem to underestimate my capabilities of Se, at least, based on what others tell me.I've heard people tell me that I am physically tough, which is something that surprises me, since I'm always self-conscience about it. Another thing that I have learned from ESTps, although from other types as well, is in what situations to use force and when to "let things go." Knowing when to apply is problematic for me at times, which is why it's good to see someone who does know when to use it appropriately. I've no problem getting aggressive, but I can have bad timing . I can't imagine having an ESTp roommate though...




Sereno wrote:

What I think is that the philosophical concept of utilitarianism originated from a Betian. It is such a logical concept, yet it disregards the individual with the ends justifying any means. That might be the reasoning for their actions, but I'm not sure. In essence, that is probably the reason that I, and probably all of the delta quadra, will always disagree with Beta.



Anyway, I am not going to challenge your ideas much in this thread (I predict too much tiresome aggro with too little useful info in return) but I feel the desire to say that not all or even most betas think the ends justify the means , just ask them what they think, and I bet there are in fact some deltas with that mindset too so I would question the basis for your idea that it originated from a beta person. That type of atitude is unlikely to be strictly quadra specific, maybe it is more type specific or just an individual thing.

What I wrote was simply a thought. In any case, there will always be exceptions to everything. I am sure that there are deltas that are utilitarian, but I was talking about the delta ideology in socionics, the description at least. This is taken from socionics.us:

[spoil:d1da32faee]4. Delta Quadra [top]
[align=left:d1da32faee] blocked with :
Types from the Delta Quadra value pragmatism, hard work, beautifully functional items, and earthy humor and enjoy "productive" relationships where people do projects together. They are usually emotionally subdued and like to discuss topics seriously with the intention of implementing their conclusions.

blocked with :
Types of this quadra enjoy discussing people, internal motivation, and self-development. They believe in peaceful self-government without coercion and in the inherent potential of each human being for personal fulfillment.

Subdued elements:
The Delta Quadra doesn't appreciate high ideals or abstractions that don't relate well to real life. They also don't like large institutions or power systems that do not take into consideration the interests of separate individuals.

Typical Delta quadra group behavior:
Discussion of interesting facts about people and places. Enjoy group outdoor activities. "Live and let live" attitude. Engage only in "productive" activities and discussions. Prefer smaller groups. Emotionally subdued; generally serious, but with periodic funny moments[/align:d1da32faee].[/spoil:d1da32faee]


How can you trust beta, which does not really value Fi, to really "care" about people they don't even know? I think that especially for ESTps it's hard enough as it is to bond with the people around them to expect them to really take strangers into account in their decisions, especially those that they disagee with. I highly doubt, and the ESTps here can correct me if I am wrong, that if an ESTp (in general) is in a situation where personal benefit or ideals are concerned, that they will consider the negative effect that will occur to other people in them achieving their benefit or goal. I'm not saying that it is "bad" to feel this way, but you definitely do not want someone like that in a position of power affecting many people. I also look at beta as people who want to change things radically, even when it is not necessary.

[Megan]

How can you trust beta, which does not really value Fi, to really "care" about people they don't even know? I think that especially for ESTps it's hard enough as it is to bond with the people around them to expect them to really take strangers into account in their decisions, especially those that they disagee with.

Sereno, I am now starting to wonder if a lot of what you write and a lot of what I disagree with you on is perhaps about how you understand . It seems you have somehow managed to make the equivalent of caring, I think this especially when I examine the part of your sentence above that I have bolded. is not about caring for others as far as I know.

polr type people are not usually globally uncaring, they do have a disposition to be either too trusting or not trusting enough and do not often know how close or how far apart their relationship with others are and tend to need explicit verbal assurances. This is how I see polr manifested most often. Then if is caring then all ESFps, all ENFps, all INFjs and all ISFjs would be caring of both the people close to them and those not so close and I think this is very unlikely to be the case. Most people here probably know at least one uncaring person of one of those types, I know I do.
Maybe I have misunderstood you (please correct me if I got it wrong) but by your reasoning alpha and beta, the types who do not value are uncaring?

[munenori2]

is not about caring for others as far as I know.

Can be, doesn't have to be though.

Also, what is your pic of? The periodic table of effin' you in the A?



If I'm mistaken, the resemblance is uncanny...

[Megan]

is not about caring for others as far as I know.

Can be, doesn't have to be though.

Yeah It can be in a way but so can . The point is that some people seem to think is directly linked to caring and somehow seem unable to account for the awful lot of types who couldn't give a rat ass for anyone but themselves and maybe there own families.

Also, what is your pic of? The periodic table of effin' you in the A?



If I'm mistaken, the resemblance is uncanny...

I never saw that resemblance before you pointed it out. It is of tetris, a rather out-dated game that I still play a bit too much.

[Lobo]

Megan Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 3:33 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sereno wrote:

How can you trust beta, which does not really value Fi, to really "care" about people they don't even know? I think that especially for ESTps it's hard enough as it is to bond with the people around them to expect them to really take strangers into account in their decisions, especially those that they disagee with.


Sereno, I am now starting to wonder if a lot of what you write and a lot of what I disagree with you on is perhaps about how you understand . It seems you have somehow managed to make the equivalent of caring, I think this especially when I examine the part of your sentence above that I have bolded. is not about caring for others as far as I know.

polr type people are not usually globally uncaring, they do have a disposition to be either too trusting or not trusting enough and do not often know how close or how far apart their relationship with others are and tend to need explicit verbal assurances. This is how I see polr manifested most often. Then if is caring then all ESFps, all ENFps, all INFjs and all ISFjs would be caring of both the people close to them and those not so close and I think this is very unlikely to be the case. Most people here probably know at least one uncaring person of one of those types, I know I do.
Maybe I have misunderstood you (please correct me if I got it wrong) but by your reasoning alpha and beta, the types who do not value are uncaring?

If you think I am wrong, I prefer you be direct about it instead of going around the block as in the first paragraph . My perception of Fi is bonding, and that it has a lot to do with caring. However, I don't see a polr as an absence of the function, but an aspect of the person that is neglected or difficult to perceive by him/herself, or that is underestimated. I don't believe that Fi polr people are not capable of maintaining bonds, it's just that it might be very difficult for them to do it, especially in long distance.

Also, if you consider exceptions to everything, it's hard to reach any type of conclusion about anything.

[Exodus]

Yes. It's not that hard to understand: Fi is about personal bonds, so types with ego Fi are more confident about making AND breaking those bonds. Some Fi types actually like to show off how easily they can get on somebody else's nerves if they want to - exerting their control over the relationship.

[Blaze]

Yes. It's not that hard to understand: Fi is about personal bonds, so types with ego Fi are more confident about making AND breaking those bonds. Some Fi types actually like to show off how easily they can get on somebody else's nerves if they want to - exerting their control over the relationship.

this sounds interesting. please explain further.

@megan: you're on to something with the Fi polr too trusting/not trusting enough. it's def an important aspect.

[mikemex]

If we are to have a fruitful discussion it's important to make a distinction between complex behavior and the elements which causes it. To put it in simple words, let's suppose that we want to talk about the individual colored dots in a picture and not the sum of them, which we interpret as an image.

So Fi is not about "caring about people", because caring about people is a complex behavior, i.e., just one of the possible manifestations of it. Fi could be better understood as a logical function which works differently to what most people associates with the word "logic".

The main difference between Fi and Ti (which is the backbone of all T and F types) is that Ti tends toward universality and Fi toward specificity. This might sound a little complex but it isn't. The only real difference is that Ti builds a system of rules which applies to everything, while Fi builds a set of systems that all work in parallel.

That explains most of the characteristics of both ways of thinking. For example, that Ti can't handle contradictions and ambiguity. Or that Fi types have a preference for Te, because unlike Ti, Te relies on factual data, i. e., "pooling data", gathered from external sources instead of a fixed set of rules like Ti.

Fi sees trees and Ti sees woods. Yes, as an average, all trees are green and all trees are big. So it is logical to think that a tree is a big and green thing. But the absolute truth is that not all trees are green and big. Some of them may never grow up fully and their foliage may be brown due to lack of sun. And they could be described as a bush (small and brown) but they ARE still trees.

I'm maybe turning this into something too complex, but what I wanted to explain is that Ti people, specially those who are low on Ne, tend to misuse Fi in unhealthy ways. This is, they wrongly turn subjective rules that are specific to them into "universal" rules. For example, if they want something they tend to believe that any means to get it are acceptable.

[Exodus]

Yes. It's not that hard to understand: Fi is about personal bonds, so types with ego Fi are more confident about making AND breaking those bonds. Some Fi types actually like to show off how easily they can get on somebody else's nerves if they want to - exerting their control over the relationship.

this sounds interesting. please explain further.

Well, I noticed this when I saw Terry Gross (an interviewer on NPR - ostensibly INFj) talking about her job in person. She played recordings of her interviews, but especially the ones that went bad, where there was some kind of interpersonal conflict. I guess she found it interesting from an Fi point of view. She would act as if she was neutral and cool, even when the questions were obviously biased or even personally invasive - which to me shows confidence in Fi.

[implied]

Yes. It's not that hard to understand: Fi is about personal bonds, so types with ego Fi are more confident about making AND breaking those bonds. Some Fi types actually like to show off how easily they can get on somebody else's nerves if they want to - exerting their control over the relationship.

this sounds interesting. please explain further.

Well, I noticed this when I saw Terry Gross (an interviewer on NPR - ostensibly INFj) talking about her job in person. She played recordings of her interviews, but especially the ones that went bad, where there was some kind of interpersonal conflict. I guess she found it interesting from an Fi point of view. She would act as if she was neutral and cool, even when the questions were obviously biased or even personally invasive - which to me shows confidence in Fi.

ah, did this include the one she did with bill o'reilly?

[Blaze]

Yes. It's not that hard to understand: Fi is about personal bonds, so types with ego Fi are more confident about making AND breaking those bonds. Some Fi types actually like to show off how easily they can get on somebody else's nerves if they want to - exerting their control over the relationship.

this sounds interesting. please explain further.

Well, I noticed this when I saw Terry Gross (an interviewer on NPR - ostensibly INFj) talking about her job in person. She played recordings of her interviews, but especially the ones that went bad, where there was some kind of interpersonal conflict. I guess she found it interesting from an Fi point of view. She would act as if she was neutral and cool, even when the questions were obviously biased or even personally invasive - which to me shows confidence in Fi.

this could be an important point to put into a type description. it's behavior connected to motivation that could be diagnostic. perhaps this is the reason why sometimes i feel like IEE's are fucking with me.....lol.

[Minde]

Ok, so I work for my conflictor and have for going on nine years. I'm pretty sure he's my conflictor, anyway. I'm INFj and he's ESTp. I think he might be of the sensing subtype, but I'm not sure. Both the individual typings and the kind of relationship we end up having make socionic sense - well, as far as I understand socionics, anyway. You who read this may have other ideas, which is fine. I may or may not agree with you.

In this thread I'll probably give a sort of documentary of what it's like from my viewpoint, giving anecdotes mostly. You can comment or question as you please. I hope you find it useful or at least entertaining.

I'm going to call my boss Joe. Angela is his wife. I think she is a Beta ST, too, though I haven't decided yet. Perhaps you can help with that.

I wrote most of the first part just to myself, and then realized that some here might like to read it, too. So, some of it is a few weeks old ("today" probably isn't today).

To give you some background, I'm a part of the leadership staff and have my own sort of section of staff that I'm responsible for. I have other tasks in addition.

-----------------------

Here, where I work right now, there is a concern for "seniority". Those who have been here longer get more privileges. The main thing that can break that is if somebody "lower" has demonstrated greater responsibility and ability than a "higher" person. Even so, consideration for hierarchy is kept in mind, occasionally agonized over. There's also concern about "well, what about me?" people who might feel slighted.

I don't think I'm quite as tied to that as Joe is. As opposed to how he first looks at seniority when giving someone power or privileges, my first instinct is to filter through the ones I know and base my decision off of individual merits or experience or even who I know best. I mean, it's not completely separate - he looks at individual merits and I also take seniority into consideration. But it is a difference. (It might just have to do with experience running a staff. I have less than they do.)

Working closer with Joe - compared to past years - is making me more aware of our socionic conflictor relationship. I'm not sure how I'm going to deal with it. If I lean on my ego functions, if I'm all about connection-making and possibilities... that's not what he's about.

I can tell I'm probably going to end up like Bowie (the girl who held one of my positions last year). The criticism that I'm sure to receive (I'm not perfect, after all, which is pretty much what he asks of me) will make me quiet and eventually shut down. With Angela, at least, that was apparently not the right approach. According to her, Bowie had a bad attitude. From my perspective, however, Bowie's attitude, while not perfect, especially near the end, was not bad just discouraged. In fact, she consistently held her temper in the face of even harsh and unfair criticism and continually worked hard and wanted to do well. I think she would have had greater success with less pressure and criticism and more encouragement and teaching.

My desire for leniency and kindness reminds me that I ought to do the same for others, even those who are hurting me. They are making mistakes, too - mistakes that need forbearance.

It's strange, though. Bowie was showing forbearance by not speaking up and letting them freely put her down. But that backfired in a way, giving them the impression of sullenness.

It's also hard because I know that trying to talk about this with any of them - Joe, Angela, etc. - would be... very difficult. This is not the type of thing they like to discuss.

[Minde]

We had a conflict today. A real one that actually manifested this time. It began when he "corrected" me in part of my job. He wanted me to do it a certain way because as far as he knew his way would work better than mine. Now, he knows a lot about how to do things, even when they're not in his specialty. I'm usually perfectly fine with getting procedural advice from him. And his reasons for wanting it this way were legitimate, except for a small factor that he did not realize but that I did. He came to me when I was most busy and focussed and told me what to do to correct my approach. When I hesitated, taken by surprise, trying to figure out what he was saying and how to tell him that he was wrong, he physically made me do it his way - as in grabbed me and positioned my body where he thought I should be. I stuttered and flustered, but I didn't know how to respond well so I just complied - until he left, when I went back to the way that I had been doing it.

Later, as I was processing the results, including dealing with the problematic ones he had caused, he came into where I was working. I wanted to explain to him why I had resisted him and why I did things the way I did. I thought that physical proof would be somehow easier to explain because evidence often speaks for itself. So I started showing him saying, "See, this is why I wanted to do it this way..." He then started going into his reasons, which I had already heard and understood. I tried to stop him and redirect him toward what I wanted him to realize. He didn't seem to be understanding me, and kept on with his reasons, which I tried to assure that I knew and agreed with - to no avail.

Now, his way of talking, even when happy, is loud and boisterous. He makes points emphatically and physically. I found myself unable to articulate. So I shut my mouth, turned away, and prepared to get back to work thinking to myself, "I'll just deal with it the best I can - It's not worth arguing over," doing my best to shove down the emotions, even though I was actually a bit upset at not being understood and being asked to do something that I knew was impractical.

He stopped me by grabbing my shoulder, "You aren't very good at dealing with conflict, are you?"

I decided that I wasn't at that moment, so I said, "Yes." Then I resolved to be better at it, so I took a couple of breaths and followed through on what I already know about how to resolve conflict, which is largely by asking the right questions and listening to the answers. It was difficult, because we were both frustrated at that point, but we finally got on the same page.

A few minutes later he called me into his office. "Sit down," he gestured at a chair. He rolled his chair over to mine, took both of my hands in his, looked me in the eye, and said, "[my name], you know I love you. And I appreciate you. I treated you harshly out there, and I'm sorry. Will you forgive me?"

Honestly, in my eyes he was just being himself, trying to get things done and done right. I wasn't mad at him and wasn't really even sure exactly what he was apologizing for. In fact, I was still experiencing relief that we had gotten to agreement on procedure. "Of course I forgive you. " kind of hoping he'd let go of what was to me his rather awkward grasp.

"Good," he said. We said a couple other things that I don't remember well, and then he kind of waved his hands in a clearing the air sort of way. He didn't want anything negative between us and was glad that it had been dispelled.

He can be a bit difficult to work with sometimes, but it's things like that that keep me around. It shows, to me, his good character. Seeing him do things like that, apologize for something he's done wrong or feels he's done wrong, makes me like and respect him. And not fear him.

[Minde]

Joe said to me today, "Have I told you you'd make a good defense attorney? You know, they're the ones who take on the bleeding-heart liberal cases. You're always wanting cooperation and kindness and peace and poor resolution of problems." Here he snortled in his "I'm just kind of joking" way and gave me a twinkly-eyed look. "Don't you think I'd make a good prosecutor?" he roared.

I forgot to ask him what he thought would happen if we went head-to-head on a case - who would win and why.

This was after he and his wife were talking to one of my girls about the proper way to do things, and I had said to the girl (because she was beginning to look a little lectured at), "It's ok, you did fine. And you'll do even better next time. "

[Exodus]

Interesting.

[Ms. Kensington]

well you two do seem to not understand the others' motivations, even if you describe them.

the physical grabbing of you is alarming. That and "you don't do well with conflict, do you" does sound like something an Se or Ni person would say to an Se polr.

[Minde]

well you two do seem to not understand the others' motivations, even if you describe them.

Yes, sometimes I think he's nuts.

the physical grabbing of you is alarming.

Not really. Or, it is and can throw me off balance and isn't always that calming, but I doubt he'd ever intentionally hurt me.

That and "you don't do well with conflict, do you" does sound like something an Se or Ni person would say to an Se polr.

Yeah... *sigh*

[FDG]

Well, you're great at reacting in that calm way. I'd probably have started a fight (not physical, just verbal) if he tried to move me around like that, lol.

[UDP]

Like I mentioned before,

sometimes beta STs are just about power and control. When unhealthy, or even having unhealthy moments, it doesn't matter what logic or evidence says. I have a lot of experience with this E1w2 LSI-Se who tries to use logic, but it's really just a means of pushing you to submit to doing things their way, testing you to see how much control they can exert or maintain over you.

Yes, as Minde said to me, he seems like a Healthy ESTp, but the general principle is still there. All types have their faults and so on, but that is something I have noticed with beta STs: sometimes it isn't about logic or evidence or anything rational - what is really going on is a control/subordination test.

[Mediator Kam]

All types have their faults and so on, but that is something I have noticed with beta STs: sometimes it isn't about logic or evidence or anything rational - what is really going on is a control/subordination test.

My brother does that exact thing, he tries to test your "power" over him a lot.

[Satan]

Ok, so I work for my conflictor and have for going on nine years. I'm pretty sure he's my conflictor, anyway. I'm INFj and he's ESTp. I think he might be of the sensing subtype, but I'm not sure. Both the individual typings and the kind of relationship we end up having make socionic sense - well, as far as I understand socionics, anyway. You who read this may have other ideas, which is fine. I may or may not agree with you.

In this thread I'll probably give a sort of documentary of what it's like from my viewpoint, giving anecdotes mostly. You can comment or question as you please. I hope you find it useful or at least entertaining.

I'm going to call my boss Joe. Angela is his wife. I think she is a Beta ST, too, though I haven't decided yet. Perhaps you can help with that.

I wrote most of the first part just to myself, and then realized that some here might like to read it, too. So, some of it is a few weeks old ("today" probably isn't today).

To give you some background, I'm a part of the leadership staff and have my own sort of section of staff that I'm responsible for. I have other tasks in addition.

-----------------------

Here, where I work right now, there is a concern for "seniority". Those who have been here longer get more privileges. The main thing that can break that is if somebody "lower" has demonstrated greater responsibility and ability than a "higher" person. Even so, consideration for hierarchy is kept in mind, occasionally agonized over. There's also concern about "well, what about me?" people who might feel slighted.

That's pretty normal isn't it. I've had people try to pull seniority on me before. Pretty much, if someone loses their temper, acts irrationally, or childishly I can't take them seriously when they want to be "senior".

Maybe somebody lower demonstrating greater responsibility, abiliity is my attitude. I'm not sure. But I do know that if you go in somewhere - and expect senior people to bow to your whims, then there's going to be opposition. And I think in a way ignoring that opposition and focusing on the job at hand, helps to not get too involved in other peoples problems. From there you can help bring them up to where you are.

I don't think I'm quite as tied to that as Joe is. As opposed to how he first looks at seniority when giving someone power or privileges, my first instinct is to filter through the ones I know and base my decision off of individual merits or experience or even who I know best. I mean, it's not completely separate - he looks at individual merits and I also take seniority into consideration. But it is a difference. (It might just have to do with experience running a staff. I have less than they do.)

Hmm, I have double-instincts for that kind of thing. There's who wants to do it least. And who is most able, and least problematic. It cuts out the middle people a bit though. But they'll tend to go where other people go anyway.

It's like if someone wants a privilege you should not give it to them. If someone wants to do something you shoudn't let them. If someone isn't sure about doing something then you should get them to do it, so that they become more confident. If someone doesn't want to do something, then they should be able to justify it.

The thing is, whenever there are more people to organise, it can make sense to "get rid" of people, who are just going to get in the way. Give them menial tasks. Or give them "made up to be important" tasks. Just to get them out of your hair. And when people prove themselves capable of dealing with "trivial" tasks, they can be upgraded to less trivial tasks. But if people struggle with trivial tasks, imagine how they're going to cope with more complex tasks!

Working closer with Joe - compared to past years - is making me more aware of our socionic conflictor relationship. I'm not sure how I'm going to deal with it. If I lean on my ego functions, if I'm all about connection-making and possibilities... that's not what he's about.

Whats' to deal with?

I can tell I'm probably going to end up like Bowie (the girl who held one of my positions last year). The criticism that I'm sure to receive (I'm not perfect, after all, which is pretty much what he asks of me) will make me quiet and eventually shut down. With Angela, at

Then do something different!

[qoute]
least, that was apparently not the right approach. According to her, Bowie had a bad attitude. From my perspective, however, Bowie's attitude, while not perfect, especially near the end, was not bad just discouraged. In fact, she consistently held her temper in the face of even harsh and unfair criticism and continually worked hard and wanted to do well. I think she would have had greater success with less pressure and criticism and more encouragement and teaching.
[/quote]

If she can't struggle with the workload, she should say smoething, not just "hold it in".

If she doesn't like being pressured so much, she should speak up. And criticism in a job, that never happens! I'VE NEVER EVER SEEN IT HAPPEN BEFORE. NO-ONE HAS EVER GOT A PROBLEM WITH ANYBODY ELSE.

Just bear it.

My desire for leniency and kindness reminds me that I ought to do the same for others, even those who are hurting me. They are making mistakes, too - mistakes that need forbearance.

Your "desire" in a work setting, seems to be just that. Your *DESIRE*. Don't bring sex into the workplace. Act professional.

It's strange, though. Bowie was showing forbearance by not speaking up and letting them freely put her down. But that backfired in a way, giving them the impression of sullenness.

You've got to fight for your right to party.

People will hold you down if you let them.

It's also hard because I know that trying to talk about this with any of them - Joe, Angela, etc. - would be... very difficult. This is not the type of thing they like to discuss.

[/quote]

Then don't talk about it. Just try to change the situation until you feel right.

[Satan]

We had a conflict today. A real one that actually manifested this time. It began when he "corrected" me in part of my job. He wanted me to do it a certain way because as far as he knew his way would work better than mine. Now, he knows a lot about how to do things, even when they're not in his specialty. I'm usually perfectly fine with getting procedural advice from him. And his reasons for wanting it this way were legitimate, except for a small factor that he did not realize but that I did. He came to me when I was most busy and focussed and told me what to do to correct my approach. When I hesitated, taken by surprise, trying to figure out what he was saying and how to tell him that he was wrong, he physically made me do it his way - as in grabbed me and positioned my body where he thought I should be. I stuttered and flustered, but I didn't know how to respond well so I just complied - until he left, when I went back to the way that I had been doing it.

If you're busy and focused, then he's interrupting you. Just say that you're fine, and you know what you're doing. Don't let him walk over you.

Later, as I was processing the results, including dealing with the problematic ones he had caused, he came into where I was working. I wanted to explain to him why I had resisted him and why I did things the way I did. I thought that physical proof would be somehow

You shouldn't need to justify your behaviours.

easier to explain because evidence often speaks for itself. So I started showing him saying, "See, this is why I wanted to do it this way..." He then started going into his reasons, which I had already heard and understood. I tried to stop him and redirect him toward what I wanted him to realize. He didn't seem to be understanding me, and kept on with his reasons, which I tried to assure that I knew and agreed with - to no avail.

Maybe you could try asking him if he's listening first. Get his attention before you start talking, and if he interrupts you, ask him if he's prepared to listen to what you have to say or not.

Now, his way of talking, even when happy, is loud and boisterous. He makes points emphatically and physically. I found myself unable to articulate. So I shut my mouth,

Maybe you could try waiting until he's finished, and looking disinterested.

turned away, and prepared to get back to work thinking to myself, "I'll just deal with it the best I can - It's not worth arguing over," doing my best to shove down the emotions, even though I was actually a bit upset at not being understood and being asked to do something that I knew was impractical.

You could just let them build up and express them.

He stopped me by grabbing my shoulder, "You aren't very good at dealing with conflict, are you?"

Tell him not to touch you, if you don't like it.

I decided that I wasn't at that moment, so I said, "Yes." Then I resolved to be better at it, so I took a couple of breaths and followed through on what I already know about how to resolve conflict, which is largely by asking the right questions and listening to the answers. It was difficult, because we were both frustrated at that point, but we finally got on the same page.

That's good.

A few minutes later he called me into his office. "Sit down," he gestured at a chair. He rolled his chair over to mine, took both of my hands in his, looked me in the eye, and said, "[my name], you know I love you. And I appreciate you. I treated you harshly out there, and I'm sorry. Will you forgive me?"

Maybe you should conditionally forgive - use that as your opportunity to be able to do things your way, as you see they should be done.

If he doesn't trust you, then he's going to keep badgering you, right?

Honestly, in my eyes he was just being himself, trying to get things done and done right. I wasn't mad at him and wasn't really even sure exactly what he was apologizing for. In fact, I was still experiencing relief that we had gotten to agreement on procedure. "Of course I forgive you. " kind of hoping he'd let go of what was to me his rather awkward grasp.

So he can get away with anything?

"Good," he said. We said a couple other things that I don't remember well, and then he kind of waved his hands in a clearing the air sort of way. He didn't want anything negative between us and was glad that it had been dispelled.

He can be a bit difficult to work with sometimes, but it's things like that that keep me around. It shows, to me, his good character. Seeing him do things like that, apologize for something he's done wrong or feels he's done wrong, makes me like and respect him. And not fear him.

Why would you fear him?

[Minde]

Thank you, all, for the kind sentiments behind your advice. However, maybe I should have made this clearer in the opening post - This is not an advice-seeking thread. It's a sharing-my-experiences-so-you-may-have-benefit thread. After nine years, I do know a few things about how to get along with the guy. So long as it's merely between the two of us, I am in no way concerned about my job security or safety. In fact, I enjoy working with him because I respect and like him - he is a good man with good character. We have a good working relationship and something that even resembles a form of friendship. Currently, I am happy with where things are. At the same time we are conflictors in personality, and I find it interesting to see how that plays out. I thought some of you might find it interesting, too, which is why I share.

Now, if you still feel like offering advice, that's fine and I even thank you. Just realize that because you are not close to the situation, you lack much of the insight and knowledge that I think would be needed to have a proper understanding and thus I will likely not listen to you. I can tell from a couple of the advice comments that some of you are making erroneous assumptions, and because of that I am far from likely to heed you. On the other hand, I suppose that it's possible someone might stumble upon a good thought or two (like Esper). So I will not try to stop any of you from attempting to advise me. Again, just realize that, unless I ask for it, I probably won't listen to or take your instructions very seriously. When I do have problems that I don't know how to deal with in regard to him, I already have advisors who are both wise and much closer to the situation.

I'm trying to be nice about this. Is it working?


To add some clarity to the physical touch issue - I really don't have much of a problem with it other than what I consider my natural aversion to force. I know his intentions are good and that he does not want to harm me. He's just a very physical person, and forceful. Also, that he'll reach out and touch me as he does is part of what shows how comfortable he is with me. Sometimes he has trouble understanding and respecting boundaries, but I'm sure that if I ever had a real problem with him in that regard, he'd listen and respect that, as he has whenever I've brought other things to his attention. He wants to do the right thing.

Additionally, the working environment is... unique. Some things are much more relaxed than in a "regular" workplace, and others are much more strict. One comparison that could be made is that it is much like a family in that there is a lot of love and closeness and trust amongst the staff. (I might add, I don't think he really thinks of it in those terms - he values other things, which are also good - but I do, and it's one reason I like working here.)

Why would you fear him?

Logically, there is no reason, except getting fired, which is not a strong likelihood at all. He's just the type of person that can easily intimidate me. He's big and loud and strong and forceful. And he did scare me for the longest time. Only relatively recently have I gained better understanding and more courage. Now that I know him better, I find it much easier to approach and talk to him. I can even joke with him now (though I find it hard to maintain for longer than a little bit).

One thing that is interesting to me is to observe who is scared of him and who isn't. For example, my ESFj friend isn't and never has been. She calls him "a great big teddy bear." Many others, though, are more fearful than me.

[UDP]

So I will not try to stop any of you from attempting to advise me. Again, just realize that, unless I ask for it, I probably won't listen to or take your instructions very seriously. When I do have problems that I don't know how to deal with in regard to him, I already have advisors who are both wise and much closer to the situation.

I'm trying to be nice about this. Is it working?

Yes. I understand what you mean.

However, I'm still compelled to say this. You can avert your eyes if you'd like.

Holy harassment Batman! Allowing that to happen without reprisal could put you down a path of harassment for sure. If he doesn't respond well, someone above him should. Physical touch is a serious offense in the work place.



Having one of the staff alerted to this type of situation who understands you both, atleast functionally well, and establishing them as a handy go-between when you need it, could help you out alot here.



Conceding to a bumbling SLE's characterizations of you probably isn't the best move. I've been labeled similar silly things by an unhealthy conflictor, such as "lazy" or "arrogant," which is really only a skewed view of my character.

You know what you were really trying to be in that situation, you were trying to communicate, and you were trying to give him what he wanted. Labeling you as bad with conflict would not be an apt description. Know who you are and express it. Maybe have something rehearsed, talk it over with your dual or something. :]

Those are very good points.

Especially the bit about harassment at work. Things are different these days. And yes, I know you've known him for 9 years. But don't get complacent in your assessment of him just because you've known him for so long and he works where he works. People change. People change often. And sometimes you just can't see it coming.

So yes, take Esper's advice, and be sure to make sure that no habitual allowances are being formed. You've known him for nine years, and he's known you - so he's already settled into some sort of grove as for what he can and cannot do with you. Even if it is "just his way", it doesn't matter.

Most people will do what they know they can get away with.

[Minde]

Thank you, you both are very kind.

[0987harts]

how is that like? i'm pretty sure it's the same as estp and infj.

[golden]

Why are you asking, and how did you determine the types of the two people in question?

INFj and ESTp together have what is called a Conflict relation. It's not one I'd recommend. But maybe the people are not typed correctly in Socionics. Please tell us more?

[Aleksei]

how is that like?

Shitty. The EII would hate the SLE for being a chaotic insensitive clod and the SLE would hate the EII for being a priss ninny.

[Beautiful sky]

Hi there.

I was in a relationship with an SLE and it started when we discovered that we had so much in common, same tv shows, books, politics, world views, and interests but when we had a closer relationship, I soon discovered I needed Te instead of Se. I needed him to make structure, routine, to make rules for me to live by, like telling me what color clothes go with such shoes and how many of certain things to have. I also required him to be clean, neat and organized like my dual and he was not that way naturally. I soon grew tired of overemphasis on Se and wanted more of a grounded "traditional" life where we did more Te things then Se. Overall, because he ignores Fi feelings, it made it really tough to get him to listen to me and to respect my feelings..he did realize that I'm very sensitive and eventually did not say things that stepped on my toes. Overall, I really do enjoy their company as long as I don't take them home.

[jaein]

Just wanting to hear some stories of conflict relations. What was it like in the beginning? How did you push each others buttons? Or if you are not an eii or sle but have seen these two in conflict, what did it look like to you?

[Beautiful sky]

Our conflict revolves around Fi and Fe. Fe makes conclusions about things based on their external society and Fi based on one's own personal feelings. One conflict that I get into with that is when Fe types say "that's what men are told now" not "he was told that" second conflict is around their lax leader like nature. They will want all the work done for them while my hard working duals work faster and will work at those menial routine jobs with pride. They both can overindulge on sweets and yummy foods, fine dining and sensory things. They are both strong and hardy individuals who joke and laugh and make silly gestures have hobbies. My duals are direct and harsh in communication and I'm accepting of that. SLE are different.

Sle want to go experience and have fun my duals want to hang out at home and talk. I would much rather provide emotional support than go collect experiences.

[Muddy]

I was visiting my brother and his roommate one day. His roommate's girlfriend whom I suspect was EII there at the time. For whatever my reason my LSI/SLE father tried to get into the house but the door was locked so he started banging loudly on the windows to try to see if anyone was inside. The EII freaked out and called the cops on my father. Luckily for my father the cops didn't take it too seriously and he got away without any penalties. (My dad was constantly getting into trouble with law so I think at that point the cops just took this kind of stuff as him just being himself.)

So yeah, that's basically what EII/SLE relations are like from my experience. SLE scares EII, then the EII seeks help from authorities instead of addressing SLE directly which pisses off the SLE for the EII being such a god damn pussy.