Consider that view retracted if I ever insinuated such a thing. They can act as heroes of progressive ethics, proponents of the values of the future generation. But they can't justify what they do to the community at large while they are doing so. They must always act on their own accord, using what support they get from other Merry types.I fail to see how it makes them morally reprehensible.
That's reasonable enough. And Fi types can stop us in our tracks if they tell us what we're doing is wrong (ie. from the perspective of their personal values), which is how INFj supervision works.Originally Posted by labcoat
Last edited by xerx; 04-08-2010 at 01:58 PM.
That is my experience with my ENTP best friend!
He talks about situations like that, but in a light as if he had no control or influence over how the situation turned out. All the blame is on the actions of others.
I don't directly accuse since he will undoubtedly get defensive, and then communication halts, but I ask questions to make him think about it from the other side.
mostly we are like that when young. then we get slapped a couple few times, and we learn responsibility. true nuff.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Oh the argument in this thread.
I had lunch today with my ILE friend. She had just purchased a lottery ticket and was looking at the numbers on it, trying to see if she could read some symbol or meaning in the two numbers that came up. The riddle is the meaning in something beyond it's existence. I teased her for looking beyond the concrete and she said "well, I'm like Einstein in that regard, no?" I said yes.
Look at Ne, and Jung; it's drive and purpose is motivating others. ILE attract a lot of people because they are able to read into the being of the person...."Maritsa, you're a sensitive person and while I see that you can easily obey people, I'm not sure that someone as manipulative and controlling is right for you." She sees that in me and through that vision of me she's able to encourage me, provide the outer me and if you're important enough to them they can push and push you in certain directions to realize your potential.
I can't say anything more...I love her. She and I have a lot in common; we both want independence and space to do our own thing but she says unlike her, I'm a lot more willing to give myself over to someone I love. She's right in that regard; I'm a lot more sensitive, while she's fragile on the inside she's stern on the outside. I'm just fragile all around.
She's very purposeful about what she wears sometimes, but mostly, on a Saturday, she wears jogging outfits; she's particular about how she organizes things, very perfectionist like attitude towards her work.
Here's the Fi PoLR
When she and I first met she was hesitant about our friendship but as time went by she and I are much more comfortable sharing our inner experiences with one another; she can either trust people very easily or make out who they are and contemplate on which category to put them in. So she behaves with a bit of restraint around strangers, keeping a psychological distance, but never does she not allow people to come in and experience her; she just doesn't jump or leap in. I can swing either way too, depending on how I feel.
I can see how she can offend people easily and not see it; she states the perceptions she gets leaning back from Fi to her base function. And in perceptions/possibilities/intuition there are things about people that people are aware of that hurt them about who they are and which people just aren't comfortable about having someone discover that and read that in them, she can read that and say it, again, just because she says "Maritsa, you're a fragile person" and I may be someone who is emotional about me being a fragile person and I start to cry when that's revealed it doesn't mean that the ILE did it on purpose to offend me. In contrast to me. I withhold a lot of what I perceive in others from telling them because I empathize, hence I'm an introvert, aka "not the type to have their thoughts on the tip of my tongue." So, I will not say "hey, you're a selfish human being" instead think "oh, he probably feels his own selfishness and is hurt by it, I shouldn't say it to make it sound like I'm intruding on his feelings of himself and hurt him more" which is subjective as opposed to objective because I could be very very wrong about how the person takes what I say. I, from my own feelings of how I wouldn't want others pointing out the obvious would not say what an ILE would say freely.
She can get really stern and say what she wants, neglecting how they will feel in the name of "truth." I often can not push someone to cry. I back off after reading certain emotional cues; she's done it before.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 04-07-2013 at 03:27 AM.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Well, Se is out static characteristics like skin texture, hair color, eyes, etc; Ne is past that outer concrete barrier and into the world of abstracted implied rather than stated characteristics; from the way I talk, my overall and general demeanor, she makes assumptions that are right on. Again, I want to recall HandiAce's experience with Ashton and Gummi in the chat room; Gummi was showing areal views of Los Angeles and Ashton said "turn that s*** off" or "put something else on, this is boring" and HandiAce read into Ashton's hidden character in saying that "Ashton must not appreciate architecture." Ashton never said that he didn't appreciate architecture, but HandiAce's conclusion past the "oh Ashton doesn't like this activity" was probably right on the money.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
@Maritsa That sounds like an ENTj.
Typically "symbolism" is more associated with Ni. Hence, you teased your demonstrative function (a common thing to do).I had lunch today with my ILE friend. She had just purchased a lottery ticket and was looking at the numbers on it, trying to see if she could read some symbol or meaning in the two numbers that came up. The riddle is the meaning in something beyond it's existence. I teased her for looking beyond the concrete and she said "well, I'm like Einstein in that regard, no?" I said yes.
ENTp Fi-Polr means they don't like to discuss things like this..."Maritsa, you're a sensitive person and while I see that you can easily obey people, I'm not sure that someone as manipulative and controlling is right for you."
Fi Polr doesn't like to share "inner experiences"When she and I first met she was hesitant about our friendship but as time went by she and I are much more comfortable sharing our inner experiences with one another
This doesn't sound like a relationship of supervision. I've also seen ENTjs also make the statement, "you are a sensitive person" to people before (not always accurately).I can see how she can offend people easily and not see it; she states the perceptions she gets leaning back from Fi to her base function. And in perceptions/possibilities/intuition there are things about people that people are aware of that hurt them about who they are and which people just aren't comfortable about having someone discover that and read that in them, she can read that and say it, again, just because she says "Maritsa, you're a fragile person" and I may be someone who is emotional about me being a fragile person and I start to cry when that's revealed it doesn't mean that the ILE did it on purpose to offend me. In contrast to me. I withhold a lot of what I perceive in others from telling them because I empathize, hence I'm an introvert, aka "not the type to have their thoughts on the tip of my tongue." So, I will not say "hey, you're a selfish human being" instead think "oh, he probably feels his own selfishness and is hurt by it, I shouldn't say it to make it sound like I'm intruding on his feelings of himself and hurt him more" which is subjective as opposed to objective because I could be very very wrong about how the person takes what I say. I, from my own feelings of how I wouldn't want others pointing out the obvious would not say what an ILE would say freely.
Last edited by Dionysus; 04-07-2013 at 09:26 PM.
No it's not; she's a classic textbook Filatove ILE
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
So I said :
"I had lunch today with my ILE friend. She had just purchased a lottery ticket and was looking at the numbers on it, trying to see if she could read some symbol or meaning in the two numbers that came up. The riddle is the meaning in something beyond it's existence. I teased her for looking beyond the concrete and she said "well, I'm like Einstein in that regard, no?" I said yes."
Filatova says:
To the ILE the world is full of riddles, which conceal unusual possibilities.
I said:
"Maritsa, you're a sensitive person and while I see that you can easily obey people, I'm not sure that someone as manipulative and controlling is right for you."
Filatova says:
ILE also wonderfully sees the potential possibilities in the people that surround him. He pushes others towards disclosing their abilities;
I said:
I can see how she can offend people easily and not see it; she states the perceptions she gets leaning back from Fi to her base function. And in perceptions/possibilities/intuition there are things about people that people are aware of that hurt them about who they are and which people just aren't comfortable about having someone discover that and read that in them, she can read that and say it, again, just because she says "Maritsa, you're a fragile person" and I may be someone who is emotional about me being a fragile person and I start to cry when that's revealed it doesn't mean that the ILE did it on purpose to offend me. In contrast to me. I withhold a lot of what I perceive in others from telling them because I empathize, hence I'm an introvert, aka "not the type to have their thoughts on the tip of my tongue." So, I will not say "hey, you're a selfish human being" instead think "oh, he probably feels his own selfishness and is hurt by it, I shouldn't say it to make it sound like I'm intruding on his feelings of himself and hurt him more" which is subjective as opposed to objective because I could be very very wrong about how the person takes what I say. I, from my own feelings of how I wouldn't want others pointing out the obvious would not say what an ILE would say freely.
Filatova says:
He cannot always discern the state of another person; he may therefore offend others in the manner by which he expresses what he’s discovered for he doesn’t seem to take into account other’s feelings in regards to the situation. But this is never the consequence of evil intent, envy or arrogance. ILE simply believes that he is speaking about something objectively, and that the truth will not offend anyone…
Me:
Just because the relationship is labeled supervision doesn't mean we're going to loath each other and each eachother up. My brother is my supervisor and he doesn't sit there saying "you don't see this color from that" etc and criticizing me all the time.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 04-07-2013 at 11:18 PM.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I'm amazed that you speak to yourself in the 3rd person, that Filatova types you ILE and also that you are a him.
Here's my brother's supervision of my Se: "This is a nice and soft and fluffy blanket, you can use this if you want; it's better than what you were using last night." In my poor ability to estimate how something I had would keep me warm overnight, I used a thin blanket and was shivering by the morning; he noticed and put another blanket over me.
Does that sound mean to you?
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
ENTp's are people persons. Despite their seeming insensitivity and cold logic, they are actually quite interested in the well-being of others. They share so much information with the world because they value others enough to share their enthusiasm for knowledge with. An ENTp who is outcast is a sad, miserable creature.
fun-loving, easily distracted, likes to research weird things, playful, awkward, factual, goes with the flow
6w7-2w3-1w2 so/sx
I know this is a bump but...
I find this irresponsibility thing funny. Yes, I'm not internally responsible. I'm somewhat responsible inter personally in stuff I can handle. It is like saying ESIs are not intellectually responsible if they don't think about quantum mechanics. My responsibility is not in the real world route work.
Routine. I can not do things same way constantly (I help people with routine tasks when needed) maybe not even twice. I just don't function that way I have very low kinesthetic memory. It takes time to figure out which hand is left ad which one is right, which leg is for the gas pedal etc.
It is bit odd that while LII is supposed to be ultra responsible with time but ILE can not handle it at all. I have seen worse time management problems in ESEs. I think it time is very much a Ti thing at least it seems to develop same time as other abstract logic abilities in people. While I don't like time constraints I have to follow it to some extent to keep others happy and survive alive. There is technology go help you being on time.
I can not lead people because there is some external goal or need of something or even some useless power stuff. I need to inspire them to like subject by offering interesting ways to view things like I have done with mathematics (with success). If you don't see anything but dullness or great physical effort in work it is internal torture just to to keep up with it. My brains just shut down. I can not handle it. It would make me mentally ill.
I don't seek external responsibilities (actually I think there is something ethically wrong taking the control of something mundane). My brain works internally connecting intangible things all the time and this actually has productive value but not immediate.
These are the things that throw ESIs off the cliff.
One story of my life:
I got a job in a chemistry lab. There was one month test period about handling things (in certified way) and after that there was long waited period of developing new methods for the lab. I got ISFj to boss me around for first two weeks. It was hell. I was actually crying alone during that phase many times. The methods were set in stone and any divergence (even hand positions) was judged. Last two weeks I had ISFp it was relaxing and understanding and she let me improve their spreadsheets with gratitude although she was still psychologically affected by ISFj terror. Anyways I couldn't continue to development phase because I sucked at everything according to the ISFj lab manager.
Last edited by The Reality Denialist; 06-03-2015 at 05:33 AM.
kinda funny how several ILEs got their panties in a bunch over a simple criticism. so let's add "can't take criticism" to the list.
any kind of ethical judgment is enough to put them in a vulnerable head-space, even just asking them how they feel about you is enough to trigger psychological discomfort. it DOES affect them - deeply, even - but they don't think it's anybody's business, nor do i think they understand just how deeply it affects them. they don't know how to take responsibility for their words/actions, but i think it's a guilt thing, and i half-agree with the notion that they can't really afford to admit their shortcomings. think of their cleverly-constructed, ever-changing backstories as joker tales. it doesn't matter where or what they come from, they just are who they are because they are, you know? they're not a summation of their experiences, really.
ILEs have a signature devil-may-care attitude which means that they have a penchant for transforming even the most mundane of events into exciting, memorable endeavors. they're generally friendly and inclusive and they have friends from all walks of life. they're a wiz with a pen and even more so with their mouths. the eternal chatterboxes. if they've taken a liking to you, they're gonna hit you left, right, and center with cute little ways that you can improve yourself. they're gonna make you the butt of all their jokes. they're all there or nowhere. if you want an eli5 summary of any semi-complex topic then an ILE is your guy/girl. the females of this sociotype are absolutely lovely, but the males are questionable at best, albeit still freakishly charismatic. they're self-preservatory by nature, but they're prone to doing uncharacteristically selfless things? we assume it's an accident.
doesn't sound ILE at all.
isn't that Si?
ILE is all about extreme amusement for logical relationships between stuff and wanting to base the world and people on those weird stuff. Not experimenters. Not interested in fitness. I cannot imagine ILE in running pants or any sort of sport activities in general. If ILE loses a child because the child is sick, they will never forgive the universe or themselves or other people or all of them together (Fi pain overload). They have trouble analysing psychologically and they love hearing EII's comments about them but then they want to fight back and prove themselves. Very competitive but intersting creatures.
I wear running pants, I like to go for nighttime jogs and breathe in the brisk cold air. I'm very inconsistent fitness-wise, but when sufficiently motivated, I like to keep the chub away.
I also would describe a lot of ILEs as "experimenters." It comes with that amusement for logical relationships between stuff; sometimes we want to teach weird facts to the world, sometimes we want to systematically build on those relationships to form new deductions or create new stuff. And sometimes we just want to try new things for their own sake, just to see what happens. The former is more typical of the Ti subtype and the latter the Ne (mostly E7) subtype, IMO, but both will generally do both to varying degrees.
if you are really ILE, that would be interesting to see, new to me
But I had read somewhere that LIE is the entrepreneur or the experimenter and ILE is the seeker or the crazy scientist. Maybe it depends on how we define experimenting. I somehow tend to think experimenting fits an entrepreneur description better, don't you think?
Not really? What is "the crazy scientist" if not an experimenter? What is experimentation if not a search for an answer, seeking?
There are also plenty of ILE entrepreneurs and plenty of LIE scientists, though yeah, there probably are more ILEs than LIEs in academia and definitely more LIEs than ILEs in the business world.
Yes ILE invents stuff. The inventor. But I am still pretty sure I read in a socionics description or book that LIE is the experimenter. ILE sees the potential with Ne. LIE sees the possibilities with Ni. Which one experiments more then?
Description (of LIE-Ni) by Victor Gulenko
Calm and balanced, conducts a regulated life, knows when to take advantage of opportunities. Quietly selects what idea it is better to follow, will always find the most optimal and advantageous output, which will give the greatest return. They are frequently a natural scientist, an experimenter, acting with their mind and hands simultaneously. Can interest themselves in chemistry, and in painting, in this case they try to bring everything to the end. Excellent hygrotechnician and experimenter. Gets along well with children, easily carries them along through their interesting actions. Outwardly more restrained and stocky than the other subtype; tries to dress well and pay attention to their health.
Both can conduct experiments. Defining any one type as "the experimenter" is an extremely narrow, stereotype-driven look into sociotype that would reduce everyone to a small cookie-cutter box. At best you can say some types have more tendency than others towards experimentation. But if any one type is associated the most with trial of new ideas and weird experiments into the unknown, it'd be ILE.
I mean like. Doc Brown is an ILE-Ne stereotype.
Now I have a weird feeling that you are right and everything else is wrong. Just a feeling though. Please excuse my Fi.
I wouldn't say "everything else is wrong." A description saying that LIE-Nis are often scientists and experimenters does not mean they're the only type that conducts experiments.It doesn't even mean they're the most closely associated with it, though sure, there are absolutely a ton of LIEs all over the sciences.
Last edited by Nanooka; 06-19-2017 at 09:05 AM.
It's interesting. I thought in academic science, there are more LII and LIE and few ILEs or ILIs. Interesting, now I have to rethink it.
There hasn't been any actual research done, but anecdotally I'd say there are a lot of the NT club in general. Academic science fields tend to skew more towards Ti though, so I would assume there are at least slightly more Alpha NTs than Gamma NTs. I'd guess the reverse for applied sciences given their usual Te-oriented bent.
The number of NT's rises, for sure, with academic levels. None in grade school, very few in high school, lots in college.
The differences that I see between ILE's and LIE's are that both types can invent things, but an LIE will only invent something that they think can be turned into a product, or can be converted into money in one way or another. ILE's are actually much more inventive than LIE's, but ILE's lose focus quickly. As soon as they get the concept, they move on to the next bright pebble, leaving the last project in disarray and incomprehensible to anyone who looks at it. ILE's are focused on discovering the concept, while LIE's want to make something that works.
The ideal framework for NT's working together in a business is, the LIE finds some business opportunity which requires a new application of principles (so there is little competition in the field yet) which has a high likelihood of producing a good return, and comes up with an initial plan or course of action to make this idea a reality. He hires an LII to mathematically prove that the idea is theoretically possible, and to help write a proposal or a paper to make sure no one is violating the laws of physics. An ILI is consulted to see what he thinks can go wrong, either with the product or the plan, but his pessimism can't be allowed to shut down the effort unless he discovers some fatal flaw. The reworked proposal is used by the LIE to test customer interest and/or to get investment money. Then a prototype is created to prove the concept, because customers have zero imagination. The LIE sets out the best approach for this, and an ILE develops the prototype with a LOT of feedback from the LIE to keep things on track and focused. At this point, it is best to bring in an SLI, because they are incredibly practical and hard-working and focused.
Once the prototype kind of works, it is turned over to the LSE, who basically gets rid of all the cool features and random possibilities implicit in the prototype, and makes it into something that is stripped down, functional, and is mass-producible.
Sometimes I tend to think following:
Alphas: F*ck the world
Gammas: I'm f*cking the world
There are also some betas and some deltas in sciences.
One thing I'm certain of: You'll find disproportionate number of LIIs in science.
Yes, there exists number of awkward ILEs some more refined. LIEs what I have seen tend to at least show high productive drive. Always ON type of person. Where as ILE is usually quite haphazard in their demeanor.
General statement:
Nope, refute, please!If you want. Everything what ILE says is not absolute. Creative Ti is not all encompassing (at least 100 % of time) while it might sound tougher absoluteness due to 4D Te.
BTW: Now we have entered into paradoxical realm.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
