self-improvement and stuff
i've seen people say focusing on your ego functions is the way to go and i've seen people say that that you should cultivate all your valued functions and i've even seen people talk about working on their polr. i wanted to make a thread to hear from people who might have a view on this that i haven't heard from yet and because i'm curious about the various reasonings behind these ideas.
Hmm, if it's about self-imrovement I guess your task should be to deal with your weaknesses (aka functions which are weak, both valued and devalued). Everyone is already adept in using their ego functions, that's why they don't necessarily need more training. But maybe it's not even about "getting a better person" by trying to understand and use every funtion. Socionics tells you something about your own view on life, your perspective. And since you know there are a lot different perspectives it might help you to understand people better. I think it shouldn't be the goal to perfect everyone to a certain ideal, but rather approve the different approaches and mediate them.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
I remember reading something about this the other day...
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...rt_and_contact
It seems to me that attempting to strengthening the inert functions would more or less have no effect. This leaves the Creative, Role, Suggestive, and Demonstrative. Out of these, I think the Role and Demonstrative are most useful for self-development.
The thing about Ego functions is that they are so strong in a person's psyche that development in them is not entirely necessary. As for the Super-Ego functions... I'm not sure about them. It seems to make sense to me that strengthening the Role function could be a good thing, but it is not the same way for the PoLR. Honestly, trying to develop the PoLR seems like a bad idea to me. I think that while strengthening of the Suggestive function is possible, it's not necessarily easy or a good idea. It is the weakest function in dimensionality other than the PoLR, and attempting to strengthen it is like self-dualization, which I have seen some sources say is not desirable. I think using the Ignoring function will produce some sort of anxiety or dissociation in a similar way using the PoLR would be, but not to such an extent. The Demonstrative function seems a good one to strengthen, though, as it is perfectly possible to do so with minimal drawbacks. A person usually understands the Demonstrative function very well, but considers it as not worth taking too seriously, subordinating it for the Creative function.
I do think that the Inert functions could be theoretically strengthened through strengthening of the complementary Contact function. That would make sense.
As to whether any of this would actually "improve" the self or just cause massive imbalance and neurosis, I cannot say.
But I take no liability.
I'd say that depends on what your goals are, and what "self-improvement" means to you. What does it mean to you to be your best self?Originally Posted by laghlagh
That said, I've never seen anything good come from people focusing on their super-ego. Don't mess with that shit. Let people who are good at it do it, and stay out of their way. You're better off not even thinking about it.
If your goal is to be a more well-rounded, healthier individual, dabble in your dual's functions, but act from your ego. Meaning, incorporate DS and HA in some measure in your life, but don't make decisions from them, they're background for your leading and creative. Kind of the life and meaning in your actions, they give substance to what you're doing, but they can't lead what you do. Ahhh, how to explain that better. . . ?
Don't ignore 7 and 8 entirely, but know they're not you, and you don't have to use them if you don't want to. They're the support for your lead and creative. What I mean by that if your lead is Fi, you'll pull from Fe to support it. You draw out what you want and need, only enough to be of use to your Fi. Same with Ni, you use it in support of Ne, if your creative is Ne. For me, I use Te just enough to support my Ti, etc. Seven and eight are accessible, but you don't worry about them, and you definitely don't focus on them. You don't want to try to improve these, because it takes your time and energy away from the fun stuff, and overfocus becomes draining, deadening, and stressful.
One problem with "self-improvement" is that too often people look at "what am I bad at?" and try to fix it, rather than saying, "what do I want?" and living their lives in accordance with that. So, what you get is a lot of people struggling to be some idea of a perfect, flawless individual, and forgetting about making their lives truly happy. When people are actively reaching towards what they truly want, then they are happy. Doesn't matter what the specific goal is, as long as it's what they want. Even if the goal is something like being able to have tons of time to sit around and do nothing.
The only useful self-improvement in my opinion, is that of character. Am I an honest person? Am I truthful with myself, and others? How do I treat other people, and myself? Do I respect myself and other people? Those kinds of things don't have anything to do with type. Messing with focus on functions, and trying to tweak your use of them to become some kind of perfectly functioning super-human, is not only fruitless, but a miserable endeavor as well.
Loved your post. This part interested me on a personal level, just because I know that at a couple of key points in my life, I literally sat down alone and said to myself, What am I good at? Now, that wasn't toward the goal of self-improvement, but in order to find a direction and move forward in life. I wanted to determine where I had natural advantages so that I could make more headway. (I settled on something, pursued it single-mindedly, and got the results I had intended. Yay, etc.)
What I want ... that's something else, and I haven't tried that in a long time. Maybe I should.
And yes, I agree that just focusing on what we suck at isn't a great approach to life. There are some things I'd rather get help with or hire someone to do. There are other things I have to do even if they're not my forte, and in those cases I try to remind myself there is more than one way to accomplish something.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
I would say that it would depend on the situation one is dealing with.
Some situations you can deal with just fine using your normal mode for processing information.
Some situations require using a different type of information than you are used to dealing with. One can try to ignore or avoid those situations, but in some cases, it's a situation that life dealt you to deal with, period. In this kind of case, if you try to ignore or avoid it, you screw up other parts of your life, creating other situations that may still require the same kinds of information the original situation needed.
Ideally, we each would have someone we could go to for help who is familiar with and successful at dealing with those kinds of situations. But this kind of resource is not always available.
So then what to do?
Sometimes, you just have to deal with it, whether you want to or not...and whether your good with it or not.
Maybe the particular situation only happens once in a blue moon. Nice.
Maybe the situation forces you to confront it on a more regular basis. Or maybe it's a long term situation (aka 18 years of raising a child with particular needs).
How will you know what kind of resources will help you, if you aren't able to handle remotely the kind of information you need to make that decision? Or if you don't know what specifically it is that you are dealing with, then how will you know what it is that you need?
In situations like these, it helps to at least try. To study, or read, or ask questions. To step out of your natural comfort zone and get your hands (brain) dirty.
Yeah, you'll likely fall down or suck the first few times. But as you gain an awareness, some parts of it might get a little easier than it used to be. That doesn't mean it will ever become natural for you to deal with that info. And it may even require all of your energy and effort even after familiarity. But, you may just surprise yourself at what you are more capable of afterwards, than you were prior.
Just because you have a sweet tooth, it doesn't mean you won't be dealt lemons.
Learning to make lemonade may just be a decent option.
...at least until the lemons are finally gone.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
hmm
Im going to have a lot of random interconnecting thoughts here, so forgive me if this comes out incohesive and inadequately assertive.
First - I think that everyone should view themselves as a nobody. If you see yourself strictly as your type, you are limited by the boxes you put yourself in. Remove the boxes and you'll grow wings. For instance - I think people of a higher IQ can have good T functions even if they're an F. Nothing is set in stone. Everyone has potential, the sky is the limit.
I have the personal philosophy that the idea's we're surrounded by and the things we interact with shape us. Ex - During my formulative years, I(IEI) was raised by an EII mother and i had one older(4 years) sister(ESE). I believe this affected me in a variety of ways. I learned how to reciprocate emotion and read emotional cues(Fe) through observing my sister playing with her friends, because... you know... i wanted friends too. And my mom played a huge role too she would say/demonstrate:"Don't do the right thing because it's right, do the right thing because you want to."
"Be a leader, be your own direction, sheep get skinned"
"Sacrifice for the sustenance of those around you, love transcends self."
I feel that because mi madre, i found a path to understanding Fi. In socionic terms, it caused the merging Base and Creative function to synthesize with my Demonstrative function. Myputs myself in others shoes. My
spots others emotions, and my
allows their feelings to become my own. Transmuting my initial yearning to understand into compassion for others in 2 simple steps.
I feel the things we identify and understand become easier to cultivate and refine within ourselves, thus making them easier to improve upon. and inversely, the things we choose to ignore and overlook become the things that we're the worst at when we have to step up. I believe there's a quote that it takes 10 years/10,000 attempts to master any given thing; i believe the cognitive metabolic functions to be no different. We can learn as much as we choose to push ourselves for.
For instance - As an IEI(H-sub) i have a tough time with Te and Si. But, as a "positive male role-model" for the kids in my family and a still-developing adult, there are times where i have to assume the responsibility of doing shit im not comfortable with. So in my first attempts at controlling my "shadow functions(they came out in a very ESTJ way) i did shitty. I yelled, i complained, i was irritable. I believe this was because i had put no effort into developing these functions yet, since i do not value them myself; it was others who needed me to assume the role(EII mother, ESI younger sister, and a couple ExFP young'ns, all of which need Te) and it was only then did i start to work on it. As i've gotten older, working these functions is still a bother, but i can control myself in this role now. I won't break down like i used to. And i feel this is very important - At my worst and most incapable, i've improved. In my most susceptible and vulnerable states, i can handle it. In an effort to help the people closest to me, i improved myself. I think it just takes effort applied in a specific area and the Balls to handle the trepidation that comes with it.
Balls! I think balls are very important. Think about women. They love balls. If a man doesn't have the balls to approach a woman, he loses her to the whirlwind of life and he also doesn't get any more comfortable approaching women. He remains shy. But by pushing himself beyond his comfort zone, communicating with women becomes easier with every attempt. Having the balls to attempts new things not only broadens one's skills, but it deepens it as well due to diligent practice.
I have an interesting friend. He tested Istp in socionics and Enfp under myers-briggs. Essentially, he see's himself as an Istp, and he purposefully tries to exude Enfp. The "Inspirer", his dual, is essentially his party face. His perspective on the matter(and forgive me if i trail from Socionics) is that as an introvert, the first thing he needed was confidence. Confidence allowed the re-prioritizing of functions. ISTP becomes ESTJ as he focused on his extroverted function around people. After he was comfortable with that step(mind you, this is a very socially adept person), he exhibited balls. He identified the things he looked to others for help with, and forced himself to do it alone. Eventually, with time spent and experience points earned, he learned to stimulate himself by switching between these roles.
Also - sidenote - He stressed the importance of how this helps with women. By switching between different modes, you confuse people trying to figure you out, and you also increase the chances of intriguing someone's interest.
Back to myself, As an IEI i have come across many other IEI's, and i figure under this train of logic, If i examine what i would want my significant other to do for me, i can pretty concisely define what i need to do in order to behave like my identical's Dual or, my dual's Identity. I believe one's identity partner is the one that can become a role-model the easiest, so in some weird half-ass-backwards kind of way by trying to become my own self-sustaining dual, i have the opportunity to conquer my shortcomings and to teach others how to do the same through there interaction with me.
One last thing - Developing Ne while your a Ni base is hard. Everything just ends up becoming Ni again in your head.
i really like this, thank you.You're welcome.
I don't think I've ever seriously explored what I'm best at and where I have a natural advantage. That's a very good idea. I tend to assume I'll be able to do whatever I try, which probably isn't the best approach.
I don't agree with this at all.
I do agree with some of the things you said about 7th and 8th supporting leading functions though.
I think neglecting your super ego function while developing your 5th and 6th too much ultimately lead you to be slave those functions. it makes someone too extreme for their desires. in my experiences I think if you learn a healthy way to balance the two poles of function, like if you areego, and you balance and develop it along with
(D)IEE~FI-(C)SLE~Ni E-5w4(Sp/Sx)/7w8(So/Sp)/9w1(sp/sx)
Regarding whether vulnerable IEs are processed at all or if that type of data is mentardolized by valued functions, some food for thought excerpted from ratcheer:
5.5.1 Inverted and Absent Qualia
The first to be considered are the “absent” and “inverted” qualia objections most closely associated with Ned Block. The “inverted qualia” objection to functionalism maintains that there could be an individual who (for example) satisfies the functional definition of our experience of red, but is experiencing green instead. It is a descendant of the claim, discussed by philosophers from Locke to Wittgenstein, that there could be an individual with an “inverted spectrum” who is behaviorally indistinguishable from someone with normal color vision; both objections trade on the contention that purely relational characterizations cannot make distinctions among distinct experiences with isomorphic causal patterns. (Even if inverted qualia are not really a possibility for human beings, given certain asymmetries in our “quality space” for color, and differences in the relations of color experiences to other mental states such as emotions, it seems possible that there are creatures with perfectly symmetrical color quality spaces for whom a purely functional characterization of color experience would fail.)
A related objection, the “absent qualia” objection, maintains that there could be creatures functionally equivalent to normal humans whose mental states have no qualitative character at all. In his well-known “Chinese nation” thought-experiment, Block imagines that the population of China (chosen because its size approximates the number of neurons in a typical human brain) is recruited to duplicate his functional organization for a period of time, receiving the equivalent of sensory input from an artificial body and passing messages back and forth via satellite. Block argues that such a “homunculi-headed” system — or “Blockhead”, as it has come to be called — would not have mental states with any qualitative character (other than the qualia possessed by the individuals themselves), and thus that states functionally equivalent to sensations or perceptions may lack their characteristic “feels”. Conversely, it has also been argued that functional role is not necessary for qualitative character: for example, the argument goes, people may have mild, but distinctive, twinges that have no typical causes or characteristic effects.
5.5.3 Functionalism and the Knowledge Argument
In another important, related, challenge to functionalism (and, more generally, physicalism), Thomas Nagel and Frank Jackson argue that a person could know all the physical and functional facts about a certain type of experience and still not “know what it's like” to have it. This is known as the “Knowledge Argument”, and its conclusion is that there are certain properties of experiences — the “what it's like” to see red, feel pain, or sense the world through echolocation — which cannot be identified with functional (or physical) properties. Though neither Nagel nor Jackson now endorse this argument, many philosophers contend that it raises special problems for any physicalistic view.
An early line of defense against these arguments, endorsed primarily but not exclusively by a priori functionalists, is known as the “Ability Hypothesis”. “Ability” theorists suggest that knowing what it's like to see red or feel pain is merely a sort of practical knowledge, a “knowing how” (to imagine, remember, or re-identify, a certain type of experience) rather than a knowledge of propositions or facts. An alternative, and currently more widespread, view among contemporary functionalists is that coming to know what it's like to see red or feel pain is indeed to acquire propositional knowledge uniquely afforded by experience, expressed in terms of first-personal concepts of those experiences. But, the argument continues, this provides no problem for functionalism (or physicalism), since these special first-personal concepts need not denote, or introduce as “modes of presentation”, any irreducibly qualitative properties. This view, of course, shares the strengths and weaknesses of the analogous response to the conceivability arguments discussed above.
Consider the super-id a comfortable and natural way of reframing the anxieties of the super-ego.
That is because the super-ego runs counter to your ego, while the super-id complements it.
I would say the healthiest thing to do is to emphasise your ego functions in your life and social interactions, since they're comfortable, natural and easy to use, and maintain outlooks given to you through your super-id by your Dual and Activity.
The best Alpha SF is one who entertains (), pursues high-potential and uncertain situations (
), and maintains critical thought (
Best according to what? To me these alpha SF (and other types who are too obsessed with functions from their quadras in general) seem broken. I don't understand how someone who must use denial to deal with reality can be healthy in the long run. This kind of thinking always lead to obsessions. Just look around how the healthiest people can deal with all functions in a relatively rational way despite their own preferences.I would say the healthiest thing to do is to emphasise your ego functions in your life and social interactions, since they're comfortable, natural and easy to use, and maintain outlooks given to you through your super-id by your Dual and Activity.
The best Alpha SF is one who entertains (
The reason why there's no agreed best type/best quadra is not because people are a bunch of hippies affraid to hurt other people's feelings. It is because all functions offer valid views on what reality can and will throw at someone's face during their lifetime, and how to deal with it in the short and the long term. Add the fact that a relatively large percentage of the population share these functions and you have an idea, but i consider it's part of "what reality can throw at someone and how to deal with it".
All in all, i think people who ignore their super-ego and/or their super-id give off a "retarded" vibe. Plus they waste ressources and energy building defenses and walls that they wouldn't need if they "tamed" the "enemy" in the first place. Acknowledging that everyone have the same basic needs is way healthier than trying to make a cult out of your quadra.
The super-ego is stressful to use. So is the super-id. That's why they're weak functions, it takes a hefty overhead of cognitive energy and discomfort to "use" them, or try and deal with the world in terms of them.
Wouldn't you rather be comfortable and do what you're good at than pretend to be something you're not, and pay the price?
I'm saying "the best Alpha SF" in terms of Alpha SFs exclusively and in general. Unless you're not addressing me with your rant about "no such thing as a 'best type'".
Don't forget the functions have a social element in that they're how you deal with the world. Society demands a commitment from you to express certain elements consistently in your career and dealings with others. It would be a painful and uncomfortable experience for an SEI to try to be an economist or a politician, for instance. However we have many great SEI musicians and entertainers.
It makes the most sense to express what your strengths are, in a way that's natural. That also doesn't mean that you defend yourself from your super-ego through denial, that's a weird result to take from my post.
Socially, surround yourself with people of your quadra. Make a life for yourself out of your ego, and mediate your cognitive shortcomings and vulnerabilities with your super-id. My opinion.
focusing on ID functions is underrated. it is the key to really making the ego functions shine. ego functions on their own are always either too localistic or too abstruse. tempering them with ID functions turns them into something societally relevant.
ID functions also offer a good way of dealing with the PoLR function, considering it gives you strengths that jive well with the PoLR function (for example, countering Se-PoLR with ID Ni).
oh by the way; the ID functions have reversed signs, so usage of ID functions does not means behaving like your contrary. contraries have aims opposite to yours, so behaving like them is counter-productive to what you're trying to do at any point. instead it means behaving like your Illusionary and/or Semi-Dual.
Yep, exactly.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
ID accentuation is really masturbatory though, even if it is productive. It's like going into hiding to perfect yourself, then coming back out fully prepared. But on the whole, I see nothing counter-productive about accentuation, as long as you are plan on implementation.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
i disagree. exclusive usage of ego functions is what's masturbatory. usage of ID functions is what turns the pointless ego-trip into something that is potentially useful to members of all quadras.ID accentuation is really masturbatory though, even if it is productive.
i actually think i'm going to take the firm stance on this: ID function usage is pretty much the only way out of the personal growth conundrum. anything else is doomed to failure due to function weakness. super-ID and super-ego functions should be trained via the help of outsiders.
even the "hidden agenda" is best reached via the Accepting ID function (for example for INTjs, use Si by first using the Te of an ESTj and then moving into Si territory from there).
Can you give a personal or other type of applicable example, other wise its just way to much conjecture.
Dude stfu, Jung is not the end all be all, we're discussing socionics. I'm talking about a real life application of what labcoat is saying, the ID being the key. If you can't give any personal expirience or example then what the fuck are you really learning. Also you aren't labcoat.
What is this "be something you're not" stuff anyways? In real life, you have to deal with a lot of situations that require functions that will or won't be in your quadra function whether you like it or not. You will also have to interact with people from all types. If you want to limit yourself and engage in couterproductive discussions it's your choice, but honestly, why would you?
If you think i was stressing out the fact that there is no best type, you missed the point. What i was stressing out is that there is a reason why mature people of any type on socionics forums are very wary of saying a whole type or quadra just sucks, and it's not because they are trying to be politically correct. It is because we all know in some way that reality (from a human perspective) consists of elements that are represented by ALL the functions. (For example you know that if you seriously say "Te sucks!", someone will come and point out that it is actually you who sucks for not noticing that Te is actually great.)
Now in case you think the reason why i was pointing this out is still not clear: Why would you choose to be socially handicapped during the times you will have to interact with people from your conflicting quadra for example, when you already know you can't just isolate yourself with your little group? You won't necessarily choose your coworkers and the projects you will undertake will most probably require you to burst your quadra bubble if you want to achieve success, or at least if you want to not be socially handicapped when you interact with third parties.
For my part, i can't stand alpha SFs who only display Si and Fe and they are my dual and activity respectively. That's why i pointed out the relative nature of your claim that they are the best. They might be the "purest", but they certainly are boring as fuck. When i spend too much time with a very SiFe dual, i end up feeling dead inside and i feel the urge to go do something else. Call me the exception that proves the rule if you want, i say it's just a relative issue.
I was definitely not saying "ignore your ego functions". Actually i could have been more explicit about my views on this aspect. In my experience, ego functions come so easily that you don't have to focus on them. People who focus on their ego functions too much only come off as obnoxious and boring overall. When you just let them do their work naturally, you only become more productive. Letting your ego functions create, and focusing on your ego functions are two different things.
Yeah i took that from the observation of people who tend to do this and not directly from your post.
I think i would weird my IEI, LSI, EIE, SLE, SEE, LIE, IEE and EII friends out if i called them to say i must spend less time with them and remove them from my projects so i can replace them with people from my quadra.
hahaha, that's great
+10. gold
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
+20.
actually Jung did at various times explicitly advise people to focus primarily on their Base function. he said it was the normal progression of a human life for a person to spend the first quarter or so of their life building up wealth, skills and credentials through the use of the Base function. the only relief from the process he explicitly spoke about was Creative function use. he described the realization of the "shadow" functions as a process that spanned over a full adult life that wasn't subject to the person's willful direction, i.e. more like something that "happened to" the person at various stages of maturation. i'm skeptical that he ever mentioned "working on" the shadow functions in an agentive capacity.
the "neurosis" that Jung mentions a lot was something he saw as commonplace to the point of almost being the norm. the pathological overemphasis was only ascribed by him to people who used the Base function to the exclusion of any function opposite in introvert/extrovert. the Creative function basically fits the bill as a means of providing relief from this neurotic extreme.
this is what Jung described as i honestly recall it. i think most of the pertaining statements are in "Psychological Types" in the appendix section. i'll try to look them up. until then, this is your word against mine.
ps. this is not to say that i don't think there is any truth to what you say. i just disagree that Jung opined as you say anywhere near unambivalently.
well, how can i explain this without resorting to stereotypes. whenever i get a sense of "succeeding" at changing the conditions of my life for the better, it has very little to do with socialization or any SF club stuff. it has much more to do with focusing on getting practical results from my knowledge, proving to myself that my theoretical efforts are not pointless meanderings but sources of concrete worth, i.e. Te usage. i don't turn into my own archnemesis (ENTj) in so doing, yet i stay Rational and use Te, so i am effectively behaving like an ESTj. it certainly "feels" like an ST state; somewhat aggressive and closed off from new ideas; just having made up my mind. an alternative is to focus on convincing people with rhetoric (i.e. Ni, Beta NF behavior without the emphasis on Fe); also an "extroverted" activity with useful effects that comes reasonably easily to me. agentive, initiative taking socialization in the bubbly, "small-talk" SF style is just not an option. it requires me to stop being me. it's impossible. Jung himself repeatedly emphasized this. any function and its dual opposite are fundamentally irreconcilable in one person. if Jung was unambiguous about one thing, it was this.
of course i have moments where an alpha SF involves me in "SF stuff", but this is not the same thing as my agentive initiative at doing so. it's "learning the super-id functions via others" like i describe in my earlier post.
this being said, i don't think you are in a position to demand clarification from me. i provide information for the benefit of its reader. i owe no one on this forum anything. i'm hardly going to assert it's completely the other way around, but to demand that i clarify my posts is straight up rude.
i just remembered this: Jung did speak about people in whom more or less all functions were equally developed, but he mentioned these people in a negative light. he called them undifferentiated and described them as being so primitive in their development that the polarization of function attitudes that is essential to healthy psychological growth had not emerged in them. (i just read about this in Psychological Types, but can't find back the exact quote right now)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
