Minus IM elements and overwhelming others

[machintruc]

I heard that Minus elements are about "creating an excess" of IM elements

LII's and ILE's overwhelm others with - by excess of logic, overanalysing things
ESE's and SEI's overwhelm others with - by excess of moods, of emotional material

SLE's and LSI's overwhelm others with - by acting territorial, posessive, and controlling
IEI's and EIE's overwhelm others with - by exaggerated idealism, dreaminess, imagination

ESI's and SEE's overwhelm others with - by showing redundancy with trends or etiquette or such
LIE's and ILI's overwhelm others with - by excess of activity, workaholism or trading-like behaviours

IEE's and EII's overwhelm others with - by excess of use of mental images and stuff
SLI's and LSE's overwhelm others with - by playing ascetic hedonists or such

This is especially true for Result types.

[munenori2]

The Delta tendencies to excess seem to jive with my own personal experience (though I was somewhat unsure of what an 'ascetic hedonist' is).

[Not A Communist Shill]

The Delta tendencies to excess seem to jive with my own personal experience (though I was somewhat unsure of what an 'ascetic hedonist' is).

e.g. someone who maturbates all the time.

[tcaudilllg]

Where did you hear about it?

It is true, minus elements are always on the verge of overwhelming plus elements because they are the object and plus is the subject. (subjective experience of the element). The object threatens the subject, as Jung discussed in Psychological Types.

Minus means, "object moves against subject"; plus means "subject moves against object". Example: +Ti leading types always have as their primary goal the imposition of their own order and logic upon others. -Ti types see this logic (which they see as coming from without) coming at them and so, hone their own logic to defend against it.

This is also how supervision works. For example, ENFp always sees -Ti -- the logic of the object -- bearing down against their situationally contrived personal logic. (+Ti) This with good reason: -Ti in ENFp is a part of the 6th function, and so has higher dimensionality than the 4th function. ENFp knows that they are logically incompetant, but sees -Ti as something akin to evil because they have seen pathological types use it for such; thus they only use +Ti, and adopt a role as the "suffering victim" who stays true to what makes sense to them in the face of a world which tells them otherwise.

[Joy]

Ne sort of overwhelms me sometimes when people seem like they keep delving into possibilities in my minor points instead of focusing on my main points. And Ti can be like that sometimes, too.

[Ezra]

LII's and ILE's overwhelm others with - by excess of logic, overanalysing things

The excess of logic I could attribute to Ti, but I think overanalysis can also be Te perhaps. I could be wrong though.

SLE's and LSI's overwhelm others with - by acting territorial, posessive, and controlling

I think that, especially for Delta NFs, the aggression and Ti close-mindedness also gets to them.

IEI's and EIE's overwhelm others with - by exaggerated idealism, dreaminess, imagination

I also think this can, to some extent, be related to Ne.

LIE's and ILI's overwhelm others with - by excess of activity, workaholism or trading-like behaviours

I'm not sure this makes sense in terms of the ILI. Aren't they supposed to be physically quite lazy? Or do you include in "activity" mental activity?

This is especially true for Result types.

What is? And what are "Result types"?

[machintruc]

I think that, especially for Delta NFs, the aggression and Ti close-mindedness also gets to them.

aha! you agree that you're close-minded

I'm not sure this makes sense in terms of the ILI. Aren't they supposed to be physically quite lazy? Or do you include in "activity" mental activity?

I mean "mechanical" and "mathematical" activity.

What is? And what are "Result types"?

Those who follow the Result cycle :

Sensing -> Logic -> Intuition -> Ethics -> Sensing

[tcaudilllg]

Can you clarify what you mean by this statement?

Isn't it true that...
-Ti is an ENFp's 4th function.
+Te is an ENFp's 6th function and has higher dimensionality than -Ti.

How and where does an ENFp use +Ti?

You've got them backwards. If +Fi in ENFp 2nd, how can -Ti be ENFp 4th?

Are you sure about this? I may be wrong, but were did you see that, then? I thought -Ti and +Te were part of the same function, just different halves.

But if we're going that deep into it, you'd better distinguish between "elements" and "functions".

[tcaudilllg]

Closed-mindedness has nothing to do with type and everything to do with proclivity to extremism.

[tcaudilllg]

I took hitta's word for it after some initial bouts of skepticism. He said he got it from Gulenko.

But if you look on Wikisocion's process/result article, the orders are made pretty plain. And the psyche must be balanced, anyhow. If one acceptor has sign X, then all the others had better be of sign X or else it's going to be pushed into the subconscious. (don't ask me why, it's how it works... well actually it's the war between the object and subject (which are inclined to perceive each other as threatening and therefore evil) but I can't really give you anything more concrete than that now).

For ENFp, the sign order is -Ne +Fi (ego) -Se +Ti (superego) -Si +Te (superid) -Ni +Fe (id).

Also some rules:
-Ti must be blocked with +Ne
+Ti must be blocked with -Se
... and I guess you can take it from there.

The original concept of parallel functions goes all the way back to Jung. Gulenko, Bukalov, and I think someone else (who apparently isn't fond of the limelight) took Jung at his word and made a system that makes sense for kids at least. (I don't think it really accounts for a lot of adult behavior, however, which is a great deal more complex and subjective than a non-mature person's).

[krieger]

I heard that Minus elements are about "creating an excess" of IM elements

This is in line with user Smilingeyes' interpretation of + and -. He always believed that information of the + kind got turned into information of the - kind at the hands of a person. The stuff that is the result of the transformation (-) is what the person accordingly ends up with in excesses.

What is odd about the view is that it is not easily reconciled with the notion of accepting and creating functions, which initially seem to respectively denote the exact same things (user Jonathan has noticed this too)... recently, though I have been investigating the notion of limiting and empowering functions, according to which there exists such a thing as a function that is empowering, creating, dynamic AND +. (it is + yet not accepting; is it the beginning or the end of something?) Applying interpretation I get: frivolous/contingent, thought to be lawful / requiring much thought to be understood (combining the last two: problematic due to a lack of understanding), based on direct observation AND the beginning of a transformation... This kind of function would signify the beginning of what Gulenko calls the "induction" of the Result types (which this kind of function is peculiar to).

Understanding the difference between accepting/creating and +/-, both of which are said to signifiy beginning and end, ultimately comes down to understanding the thinking of the Result group of types. In the Process groups, the two coïncide and are thus not problematic.

* I am highlighting the dynamic function because it relates to direct observation. One could highlight the static (limiting) function, which would result a form of thought where one deduces a fact from a "modeled" understanding (a belief)... but this can not be a real beginning, because the model or the belief must come from somewhere.

It is true, minus elements are always on the verge of overwhelming plus elements because they are the object and plus is the subject.

An explicit statement that I agree with you on. - signifies focus, whereas + signifies decreased focus. The former signifies studying an object, the latter recognizing the placement of the object within an overlooking view of the situation (the subject's position).