Printable View
Interesting, always nice to have other enthusiasts too..
I am currently trying to figure out whether I am INFP or INFJ. I test as INFP but I am probably so familiar with socionics that the tests have become more or less meaningless, you pretty much know what the questions are about etc. Would you, or anyone else, happen to have any ideas how to tell INFPs and INFJs apart?
They have different facial expressions and mannerisms. Both try to be polite, but INFP's smile more often. And INFJ's use "direct" speech and INFP's use "indirect" speech.Quote:
Originally Posted by CuriousSoul
CuriousSoul,
The indeciseveness in your posts would indicate to me that you are most likely an INFj. Introverted feeling, which is a rational function, means you are very dilligent and not impulsive about coming to a final conclusion about things. Introverted thinkers are the same, only they tend to grasp logical ideas much faster than an introverted feeler, although the opposite would be said for relationship ethics (e.g. knowing how people feel about one another.) I, as an INTj, have a very difficult time knowing if someone likes me, and also if I like them. With a new romantic interest, I will often go back and forth, back and forth often never coming to a conclusion on whether they are interested in me or even if I'm truly interested in them. I try to analyze my own emotions which is near impossible as they by nature will effect my judgement and lessen my objectivity towards the woman.
Stable-reserved types (INTj, INFj, ISFj, and ISTj) do not like to make hasty decisions, and INTjs and INFjs especially like the final decision to be as close to perfect or accurate as possible when finally made. I myself went back and forth on my own type for many months before settling on INTj, because I had just started studying typology, and was therefore realizing that I didn't really have enough information to be comfortable with my final decision,
Here's a test for you though concerning the INFp - INFj issue...
Are you "turned-on" by dangerous aggressive situations, and aggressive physical people? Do you find yourself drawn to people with power and situations in which you feel powerful?
Are you "turned-n" by learning new things and acquiring new knowledge? Do you like to listen to people talk about facts and history? Do you like being in a position where you are able to feel knowledgeable and competent in your undertaking? Do you like to teach others?
If you answered yes to question one...you are MOST likely an INFp.
If you answered yes to question two...you are MOST likely an INFj.
If neither apply to you, then you might want to consider another type...such as INTj. Sometimes, especially if you are female, societal upbringing can force a more well-developed feeling function than might be found in men of the same type. Many INTj women especially can come across as warmer and more sensitive than their male counter-parts because they have learned that's what is expected of them. I would say though, that from reading your posts throughout this forum, that you are most likely an INFj, or quite possibly an INTj. Hope that helped.
INFPs turned on by dangerous, aggresive situation?
wow, i never knew that.
More like aggressive people. Remember, once they know they get a whiff of that cheese, they are compelled to find it.
/offtopic: yeah, one more INFP in the game (myself)
but my english is so ridiculous that I prefer only to read.
....Quote:
Do you like being in a position where you are able to feel knowledgeable and competent in your undertaking?
aggresive people... i guess so. more like authoritative and proactive people. but depending on the situation, they can turn me off as well. i find that i tend to avoid relatives who are domineering or loud. i often end up stonewalling in their presence.Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticSonic
the reason i asked SFVB is because, as an INFP, i definitely don't get turned on by dangerous, aggresive situations. i'm not interested in watching movies like 'Rambo' or seeing wrestlers beating the living daylights out of each other.
What I might do in CuriousSoul's case is consider the hidden agenda of the INFj vs. the INFp, this helped me greatly in identifying myself as an INTp vs. INTj. I took one look at the hidden agendas and understood immediately that I wasn't an INTj, and also later actually meeting an INTj type made me understand the difference in general much more clearly.
The hidden agenda of the INFj is to be healthy, and the INFp's is to understand. I'm not sure how these manifest themselves or how they feel in the mind of folks with these types, but as either an INFj or an INFp you might know immediately. I personally would have a much easier time deciding on INFj or INFp if I was looking at one, because the V.I.'s are radically different in my opinion, especially in the way the two walk and the facial expressions they make. I don't know if I agree with INFp's being "turned on" by dangerous situations, sounds more specific to personality than to a socionics type.
To respond to SFVB's original post, I can relate to having difficulty getting other folks interested in socionics, it seems like a lot of them get hung up on the idea that one type is better than another, and even if I can convince them that this isn't at all true, and that's not what the science is about, many of them seem to dislike the idea that they have a "type" of any kind, I guess they see it as kind of limiting somehow. It's a shame but as an INTp i'm used to being the one in the group with strange and unusual interests :-)
I know two INFps. As we all know, they have their hidden agenda being Ti- The Structural Logic. As Sergei Ganin sayd, it's suicidal for INFp to admit that he or she is not understanding something. But this function is not switched on all the time. It someting like a supportive function. When needed, INFp can well illustrate it's talking with scientithic theories. But those theories are not acquiered fully, but as an interesting illustrations, which it thinks are acquiered fully and very good. Ti is weak and INFp is bad at calculating something, when needed, f.e calculating the prize at the MacDonald's, INFp long thinks how much money it has to give. INFp thinks it's Ti being very strong, but how ever, INFp has hard times, when explaining something structurally, makes everithing going fuzzy, but doesn't admit it and takes for an help it's Fi to deter others dissapointmentes. How ever, INFp has a good memory, cause of it's Ni- the Intuition of Time, which greatly remembers occasions. INFp is fascinated by brand new scientithic theories and it well remembers how some experiment was done or how to work on the task in laboratory.Ni also helps INFp to spot contradictions in others thoughts and at INFps most voluminious field of knowledge, it likes to demonstrate it's logical abilites of spoting illogicality.
INFps Ti much affects it's career choise. Cause of it's Ni, INFp is good at math, chemistry, biology, but doesn't like Physics, cause of it's practicalness demanding the use of Te, which is very weak in INFp, f.e INFp delays a lot with matters of hard work. But INFp conciders it self being very logical and talented at elementary science, so it chooses for it self career as biologist or gene technologist or in any other field of mathematical scienceses. It's not bad acutally at that, it becomes into intellectual, but how ever it's scientithic work becomes very specific, it is bad explaining things in common language and INFp doesn't form good and usefull hypothesis for the growth of science.
INFp is also facinated by people with strong Ti. INFp is driven for the people who are with good analytical abilities. It becomes exited and cheeres that person to speak about it's theories. At conversations it constantly demands colluctor to speak something intelligent and smart. Usually INFp likes ENTps and I am not surprised if INFP marries a lot into Illusionary Relations.
What are some easy ways to tell whether or not someone is an INFp or INFj? Are there any tells, so to speak, that would make it clear which type a person is?
I think a good way would be with their self-image. An INFp and INFj i know have strong differences in that. The INFj goes on and on about how principled and morally developed she is. The INFp is less serious. She's okay apearing less adultlike. The INFj is more critical. INFp is more random.
INFj had more inside jokes and was more likely to split groups up. The INFp tried to be in the larger group. INFj was always trying to make things more personal then they were. INFj also did more things on principal. INFj also acted more delicate, like really feminine, and the INFp is like <_< >_> "...ok"
And something that might go against popular opionion, but in my experience, the INFp is okay with showing the world how depressed she was, and the INFj tries to hide her depression and blend into the Emotional Background.
(INFj may be ISFj, IDK, seems more Delta and Intuitive...) (I'm sure of the INFp's type,and she also typed herself)
The INFp is like my best friend. And the INFj was more like a close acquaintance.
My mother is an INFj and I'm an INFp. My mom rarely shows her negative emotions even with family and I feel free to let eveyone see if I'm depressed (with family anyway. Sometimes I sigh really loudly if I'm depressed among acquaintances. My mother would never do this. She would sit there stoically or smile slightly as if nothing were wrong). She emphasizes her moral principals and I tend to see things from a variety of viewpoints (not that I don't have morals, just that I'm not emphasizing them all the time). My mom thinks she's not very smart and always raves about other people's smarts or looks or whatever. She's getting better at not putting herself down but I would say that she has a worse self image than I do. I have moments of emotional intensity, she seems very even-keeled, emotionally.
The difference is that EII are more likely to get angry than IEI.
Yes. Although my mother does a good job of hiding her anger. I'm almost never angry. Sad, yes. Angry, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by machintruc
I'm like you in that aspect, redbaron. (I'm not implying that I'm an INFp, but rather INFjs are likely to do that as well.)Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
INFp: :Fe:
INFj: :Fi:
INFp's :Fe: will give them the impression of being very warm, friendly, and emotionally open people. They'll likely jump at the opportunity to say hi to you (if they know you, that is), and will ask all sorts of questions about you and your emotional life in casual conversation. [s:c079b6b36d]They have strong morals, but their :Fi: is considerably weaker than their :Fe:, leading them to sometimes sacrifice principle to achieve desirable relations with others.[/s:c079b6b36d] (I'm rethinking this concept. My moral system may be more focused on outward treatment of others). Still, I've made some significant :Fi: blunders in my life that I still can't stop thinking about, even to this day.
INFj's :Fi: will give them the impression of being very moral, ascetic beings. They are kind and approachable, but unlike their bubblier INFp counterparts, they radiate a seeming sadness and seriousness. They value self-sacrifice, loyalty, steadfastness, and principle. Their :Fe: is considerably weaker than their :Fi:, making them seem cold and unfeeling at times. I once asked about an INFj I knew, "is she as mean as she looks?"
INFp: :Se: dual seeking
INFj: :Te: dual seeking
INFps crave adventure and stimulation. They love exciting, novel atmospheres in which they can meet all sorts of new people and have all sorts of new experiences. I, for one, can't get enough of road trips :). They can also be very sexually adventurous and rebellious despite seeming modest at first. They are also very spontaneous and love doing things on the fly.
INFjs crave atmospheres in which they can discuss their values and other topics of intellectual interest with close friends. They're often serious, religious (if not observantly religious, philosophical) people who value stability and self-improvement. In defense of my fellow INFps, we are also very serious and value intellectualism and self-improvement, but not to the degree which INFjs do.
Lastly
INFp: :Te: POLr
INFj: :Se: POLr
INFp's :Te: POLr manifests itself in their lack of organization and difficulty with business matters. Anything involving economics, bureaucratic paperwork, applying for jobs, etc. is anathema to INFps. They can do it when they apply themselves, but it will never be natural or enjoyable for them.
INFj's :Se: POLr manifests itself in their aversion to change, squeamishness about health, and dislike of rough humor. They're also very sensitive to their physical surroundings. I'm probably missing a lot of things when I discuss the :Se: POLr, but in essence its much more than being unathletic or tripping over things (I actually know some very athletic INFjs).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but these are a few things to look at.
Oh, and also:
Not true. It is very easy for me to get angry, especially righteously indignant. My fury is unmatched when someone treats me or my loved ones poorly, takes advantage of someone weaker than them, refuses to respect me and others, doesn't CARE about others, or does anything mean-spirited or unjust. Perhaps you could say this is INFj-esque, but I find it doesn't at all conflict with my being INFp. It's a form of :Fe: ethics, so to speak.Quote:
EII is also more likely to get angry.
But back to the discussion about anger. I wouldn't be averse to saying that I'm angry, even furious, most of the time, especially regarding politics. A lot of INFps are social activists, but we burn out easily due to the emotional investment we put into our causes.
I would say the key difference, in essence, is that INFps and INFjs get angry about different things. There's probably some overlap regarding the social issues that I just discussed, but in other matters there are differences. INFps get angrier when someone is treated badly, whereas INFjs get angrier when someone does something contrary to their morals, i.e. someone not keeping a promise. This area is very nebulous, however, and requires further thought and elucidation.
INFj anger seems to be more of a 'righteous' anger, e.g. about global issues, or whether someone has acted improperly etc. - INFps on the otherhand, don't like people telling them what they should make of their lives etc.
Just orienting myself to this forum... in Jungian typology and Myers-Briggs, I test INFP. I identify strongly with the pure forms of Fi and Ne -- convinced that my primary function is Fi. As an introvert, my first impulse is to "feel" internally my reactions to things in the external.
Does that make me INFj in Socionics? The one time I took the Socionics test, I still came out INFp. However, I can't really "unlearn" my concepts of the pure functions and just accept that I'd be Fe and Ni.
How does one reconcile the different typologies?
That is not a good definition of Fi in socionics or in Jung, it might be so in Myers-Briggs. In socionics, what you described is perfectly consistent with being INFp, that is NiFe, where Fe is "catching" the external emotional atmosphere and influencing what you feel internally.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
No, and it's too little information to be sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
The first step is indeed to "unlearn" it and understand each typology's concept of the functions in their own terms. Jung's functions and socionics' functions are similar, but still significantly different, while Myers-Briggs has made a total mess of the functions.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
So far I'd say that you're more likely INFp than INFj in socionics, assuming you're one of the two.
But the focus is external then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat
With Myers-Briggs, are you referring to the Introvert-Extrovert dominant functions, where the J-P orientation indicates the secondary extroverted function? As I recall, MB introduced the J-P element based on Jung's definitions of rational and irrational functions.Quote:
The first step is indeed to "unlearn" it and understand each typology's concept of the functions in their own terms. Jung's functions and socionics' functions are similar, but still significantly different, while Myers-Briggs has made a total mess of the functions.
It does fit better than the INFj description. My Oldham results indicated a cluster of high Idiosyncratic, Dramatic, Sensitive and Self-Confident responses. Always found that high Dramatic result puzzling, being so self-conscious.Quote:
So far I'd say that you're more likely INFp than INFj in socionics, assuming you're one of the two.
The main focus of the INFp is internal, based on Ni which are very personal images and of time-flow. But these are shaped by external emotional focus. If it is seen as unsatisfactory, the internal Ni focus is not satisfactory either.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
I meant that if you look at Myers-Briggs from the point of view of functions, it's not consistent with socionics at all and not with Jung very much either.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
In socionics, the rationality or irrationality of your base function - whether introverted or extroverted - defines your general irrationality or irrationality.
I thought I was sure, my type definitely INFj, EII, etc. But now I'm not sure if I really understand what INFj is all about. My main cause of confusion right now: what is the IJ temperament all about? That's what has got me wondering. To help me figure this out, I will compare the Filatova descriptions of INFp and INFj:
I usually don't know what the future will bring, although I'm really good at coming up with many different possibilities for the future of something/someone. I'm all about potential and the lack of same. I always thought that was :Ne: . But the one true future? No. And I get uncomfortable when people try to get me to nail it down. I actually have difficulty envisioning my own future, I can't see it with any detail, I just know it's coming and I know I can handle it whatever it is. And when people ask for my insight into their futures, I really dislike that. For example, I have an ESFp friend who is always asking me what I think is going to happen with this boyfriend or that boyfriend. She asks me because I have a lot of insight into why people behave the way that they do, and the attitudes people have and what those things mean. All of that I associate with :Fi:. So I can say, "he's a bad person, don't try to see the good in him cause it's not there and never will be". But I can't tell her if she will develop a physical attraction to a guy she's only emotionally into right now. I just don't know.Quote:
The IEI’s principal value in the world: the luxurious gardens of his own imagination. Through this :Ni: it is possible for him to penetrate into the past and future, to feel the surrounding world in its wholeness, to observe the dynamics of present occurrences, and furthermore (Fi) to emotionally inspire people to take charge of activities deemed necessary.
I'm not sure I know what this means. I'm preoccupied with what kind of person someone really is, and why they treat others the way they do. Sometimes a good person treats someone else badly. The worst though, is when a bad person acts good and people fall for it. I feel very strongly that I can tell if a person is essentially good or bad. What information element is that?Quote:
The EII’s condition of normal life represents itself in the harmony of human relations, the observance of norms of ethics, morals, and the cautious storage of traditions. Therefore she finds it necessary to occupy herself with matters of moral refinement, to develop spirituality, and to seek true values in others.
One of my dominant activities is bringing good people into harmony with one another, and protecting them from bad people. I often serve as the mediator and I'm pretty good at coming up with solutions that will work for both parties.
Fantasy and adventure are my favorite novels, the only kind I read, as I have come to prefer non-fiction. And I do love to get carried away by my imagination for long, long periods of time. I often feel like paying attention to the "real world" is mundane, disappointing and burdensome. It's hard for me to stay focused. So, point for IEI I guess.Quote:
He’s drawn towards novels containing fantasy and adventure. Here he participates, together with imaginary heroes, in his adventures. The IEI loves to give himself up, for long periods, dreaming.
In fact, the only reason I'm considering IEI at all is that I think I might be an irrational, dreamer type. I spend precious little of my time doing any kind of work. I'm also not neat and tidy at all. But the following fits me very much:
I don't even like strong people. The weak, the misunderstood, the outcast, the underdog...those are my people. And those friends I have who try to be strong know that they can come to me with any depravity, anything at all, because if I've determined the essence of someone's character, I don't care how they behave. It's the weak who really need me. However, I'm not good at comforting people with words. I comfort people because I'll listen to anything they want to say, for however long they need to say it. And I always take their side.Quote:
When she first arrives amongst a group of people she holds herself back. Once she has established a degree of control in regards to the psychological atmosphere of occurences within the group, and only then, after she has soaked herself in the atmosphere, will she consider becoming a full-fledged member of the collective.
EII often makes acquaintence with those that are weak or unhappy. These people serve to incite the desire to help, to support, and to comfort others, within her. To her others will frequently turn for help and she accepts them by examining their confessions for hours on end. She attempts to get accustomed to the psychological difficulties being experienced by the collocutor and she tries to take their side and support them.
I don't want this post to go on too long, I feel like I'm confusing myself. I identify strongly with Delta quadra, and not at all with Beta. Really I don't. I'm pretty serious, even if I am a dreamer. But I'm also really go-with-the-flow. I hate when people make others feel bad, which is why I just can't get with ESTps or the Beta sense of humor, or Beta "honesty". I like things to be soft, stable and comfortable. I want someone to take care of me, not push me. Ew, I don't like being pushed. I like being catered to. Seems clear I must be EII, right? But I identify with IP. I'm just confused.
i am an INTj and we share an Se polr. I also identify strongly with IP temperament. I think you're INFj.
That is :Fi: . Your post, as well as the other one addressed to Phaedrus in the MBTI thread, suggests very strongly that you are EII and not IEI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danielle
As for the IP temperament, I think you're probably looking at external behavioral traits rather than what really makes the temperament. I will say that the present temperament descriptions (like those by me in the wikisocion) aren't helping. Probably the "go-with-the-flow" thing should be elaborated on. The "go-with-the-flow" is a more internal thing; where INFjs do NOT go with the flow at all is in :Fi: matters, and that's what counts.
This one is easy. Enter into a relationship with a certified SLE, and if after two years you have committed suicide, you are an EIE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danielle
I'm definitely IEI and I don't have this ability either. Although I dislike not knowing how things in a given situation are going to proceed (especially romantic ones), I prefer the uncertainty to pushing a premature conclusion just to be sure. I do find that the more I want something to go a certain way, the more scrambled I get in attempting to influence the outcome.Quote:
I usually don't know what the future will bring, although I'm really good at coming up with many different possibilities for the future of something/someone. I'm all about potential and the lack of same. I always thought that was :Ne: . But the one true future? No. And I get uncomfortable when people try to get me to nail it down. I actually have difficulty envisioning my own future, I can't see it with any detail, I just know it's coming and I know I can handle it whatever it is.
I've also done quite a lot of introspection about other peoples' motivations for what they do and how they react. I'm quite good at gleaning insight about other people, but often hapless to take my own advice.Quote:
And when people ask for my insight into their futures, I really dislike that. For example, I have an ESFp friend who is always asking me what I think is going to happen with this boyfriend or that boyfriend. She asks me because I have a lot of insight into why people behave the way that they do, and the attitudes people have and what those things mean. All of that I associate with :Fi:. So I can say, "he's a bad person, don't try to see the good in him cause it's not there and never will be". But I can't tell her if she will develop a physical attraction to a guy she's only emotionally into right now. I just don't know.
I usually don't tend to think in terms of essential "good" or "bad". That sounds very INFj, actually, INFp doesn't tend toward definitive judgements. There's an awful lot of gray.Quote:
I'm not sure I know what this means. I'm preoccupied with what kind of person someone really is, and why they treat others the way they do. Sometimes a good person treats someone else badly. The worst though, is when a bad person acts good and people fall for it. I feel very strongly that I can tell if a person is essentially good or bad. What information element is that?
This doesn't sound IEI either. I don't feel compulsion to "protect" anyone. Again, "good vs. bad" is not the level of judgement I tend to make on a regular basis. I don't particularly like to get in the middle of situations, either.Quote:
One of my dominant activities is bringing good people into harmony with one another, and protecting them from bad people. I often serve as the mediator and I'm pretty good at coming up with solutions that will work for both parties.
I relate to those sentiments also.Quote:
Fantasy and adventure are my favorite novels, the only kind I read, as I have come to prefer non-fiction. And I do love to get carried away by my imagination for long, long periods of time. I often feel like paying attention to the "real world" is mundane, disappointing and burdensome. It's hard for me to stay focused. So, point for IEI I guess.
This description sounds exactly like what you have been describing about yourself.Quote:
EII often makes acquaintence with those that are weak or unhappy. These people serve to incite the desire to help, to support, and to comfort others, within her. To her others will frequently turn for help and she accepts them by examining their confessions for hours on end. She attempts to get accustomed to the psychological difficulties being experienced by the collocutor and she tries to take their side and support them.
I've actually found I find it a little difficult to prop other people up when they're down. Like I don't want them to get too dependent on me. While I care about my friends dearly, I'm often not sure how to support them, ie: WHAT they actually need from me. I am willing to listen to anything they care to tell me. And I never criticize. (Although I will carefully point out what they might need to look at to take steps).Quote:
I don't even like strong people. The weak, the misunderstood, the outcast, the underdog...those are my people. And those friends I have who try to be strong know that they can come to me with any depravity, anything at all, because if I've determined the essence of someone's character, I don't care how they behave. It's the weak who really need me. However, I'm not good at comforting people with words. I comfort people because I'll listen to anything they want to say, for however long they need to say it. And I always take their side.
Occasionally, I'm hesitant to "take sides", and have caught flak from friends who expect this.
I guess Beta humor can be often sarcastic and cutting. Depends what the target is, I guess. Beta "honesty", eh? Is this a tendency to be unwilling to sugar-coat things?Quote:
I'm pretty serious, even if I am a dreamer. But I'm also really go-with-the-flow. I hate when people make others feel bad, which is why I just can't get with ESTps or the Beta sense of humor, or Beta "honesty". I like things to be soft, stable and comfortable. I want someone to take care of me, not push me. Ew, I don't like being pushed. I like being catered to. Seems clear I must be EII, right? But I identify with IP. I'm just confused.
You seem very adamant about closure, which I tend to think would associate you with INFj. Visionary element, but with more motivation to actually get out and apply your idealism in your interactions with others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezra
You sound much more INFj than INFp to me.
Thanks for the feedback, and so quick too. I'm a Socionics novice, so I'm still wading through this. There's something about the tone used to describe EIIs that is disconcerting me. For example, EIIs are said to work from "dawn to dawn". They're also really "self-sacrificing" and dutiful. Well, I'm pretty lazy, and I tend to avoid responsibility. Oh, and the EII cannot abide being untidy, according to socioniko.net. But I've always been leisurely and slow, and I can't keep things clean at all. I feel like my soul is being drained when I have to clean something. My living quarters are always a mess. I won't clean the kitchen, but I also can't cook in a dirty kitchen, even mildly dirty/cluttered. If someone else were to clean for me, I'd definitely appreciate and respect that. I want things neat, organized and clean. I just can't do it. So what does that say with regard to :Si:? Is that hidden agenda? But how could an INFj be a mess, as I am? Well, on the outside I'm a mess, but on the inside, I am very steady. I think it's clear that I'm INFj, I just don't understand everything as well as I'd like.
don't ESTjs do a reasonable amount of this sort of cleaning, too (like ESFjs)? your "if someone were to clean for me..." thing sounds like seeking out a :Si: type, to me. one thing to note is how you react if you have to stay in a house that is excessively dirty and disorganized, where there's not really any structure or organization at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danielle
the other thing is that i do not believe INFjs are suckers like they get made out to be here. see the description of the INFj in this article by meged that i like. i don't it's like they're unkind people or something. just that they aren't willing to let *anything* pass. self-sacrificing isn't exactly the word i would use.
It says that you value :Si: but you need someone's help on that. That is, you have a :Si: ego type as your dual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danielle
I think EII. She sounds so much like Minde IMO.
Umm. Slight possibility of IEE? I dunno.
No way you are IEI
Okay, I accept it. I am not IEI. But why "no way"? I have some ideas now from this thread. For example, I think I understand about valuing :Si: but needing help with it. Just from observing me, I bet people wouldn't be able to tell at first, since I don't seem to do much about my health, nor am I a clean person (very shameful to have to admit that). Also, I am very sensitive to loud noises, bright lights, tastes, etc. (as the Si hidden agenda is described on the wiki). I crave physical comfort, because a physically safe, soft, comfortable, steady environment makes it easier for me to be emotionally stable and exercise my imagination. As it is, I often find myself in the caretaker role of others but secretly I want someone else to handle that for me.
Do IEIs not value :Si: ? What does that look like? And what is negative :Si: versus positive? I don't understand any of that yet, because I haven't found a good explanation. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
We definitely don't value :Si:. We have an :Si: role function. What you just described sounds perfectly like :Si: hidden agenda - needing help with all the stuff you just said is definitely hidden agenda, not role. You seem to really appreciate a CAREGIVER, that would be your Dual, the LSE ... IEIs prefer an Aggressor who focuses on :Se: instead of :Si: (SLE)
Role :Si: is a bit hard to describe. For me, it's the feeling of discomfort internally, all the time. It's a very awkward feeling and I hate it. I wish I didn't have to deal with it, and have someone pour :Se: all over me so the awkward :Si: moments would go away instead of wanting help with it like you do. The awkwardness can be things like not feeling attractive all the time ... sometimes I will constantly feel like my hair's all out of whack, etc... just not being comfortable. I put extra effort into looking good, which a lot of IEIs do and that is really indicative of an :Si: role, it's a bit overblown and exaggerated. Also, I am extremely fucking clumsy and gahhhh, hate that about myself. Especially if I'm trying to impress someone, I will stutter and trip over myself. Jeez. I do not pay any attention to my surroundings, don't know how they really relate to me.
Oh, and I forgot one huge thing: I can NOT "relllllllllllax" as the :Si: Ego and Dual seeking types all want... gosh, the whole idea of people telling me to relax annoys me.
What about 'chillax'?Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
( :wink: )
Awww, you're such a cutie. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
'Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
Totally! From day to day I can feel completely different about my overall attractiveness. Even from one hour to the next. Focusing on some seemingly small and insignificant flaw can completely change my feelings.
Don't you want to just throttle them? I've gone off on tirades just to prove a point about that. :wink:Quote:
Oh, and I forgot one huge thing: I can NOT "relllllllllllax" as the :Si: Ego and Dual seeking types all want... gosh, the whole idea of people telling me to relax annoys me.
Ugh! Infantile role baby talk! :shock:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezra
What are you trying to do here *suspicious eyes*Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezra
I don't even like people telling me to relax, and I usually get people from gamma saying it so, IDK about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
I want to compare and contrast these two with examples to help me get closer to typing myself, but also to help me better distinguish the two types.
I am reading this thread: http://the16types.info/vbulletin/sho...55&mode=linear and as a side thought after reading a little bit of the thread, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the relationship between these types from a Socionics sense and trying to apply what I know practically. This page gives me some ideas of the MBTI contrast and sense, and I can tell you what I identify with, but I'll withhold that for the moment.
Name me something (a sentiment, a saying, anything) that an EII would say/do that an IEI would never be caught saying/doing. Vice versa.
Random questions of things that have occured that I've been working through:
How does an EII/IEI handle short term tasks as far as dedication? What I mean by that is say a friend asks for a hand in assistance with something. How much energy is the EII/IEI willing to exhaust to see to it that it gets done?
How does an EII/IEI handle longer term tasks as far as dedication? An example would be following through on New Year's Resolutions, or saying something like "I will dedicate myself this year to working out three times a week"
What are other aspects that I can't think of at the moment between the two that can be distinguished differentiated (similar to how this was done on the linked thread)?
Basically, I just want real-world examples that I can say "yes that is me" or "no that is not me" to when comparing EII and IEI.
Is there another thread on this that is slipping past my searches? :-/
You're not IEI. If not EII, maybe IEE.
Are the following traits manifested/observed in many EII's as well ? I've been reading about the infj/p confusion, and am wondering if these particular traits are also commonly present with EIIs
Quote:
Particularly, I've noted here that many self-described IEI report various traits of spaciness, passivity, shyness, nonassertiveness and the tendency to "go along" with more willful personalities.
To me, EIIs come off more as 'calm' and IEIs as 'dreamy.'
The INFjs I know aren't aggressive or assertive, but neither can they be described by those characteristics. From my perspective, they seem to know who they are and what they want. They seem to resist pressure, in a quiet and unassuming way. They're simply quite steadfast. They don't make a fuss or try to force people to come around to their perspective, but neither do they 'go along' with opinions and ideas they don't agree with, just because the espouser of those ideas is 'forceful'.
oh and do EII's also show a hot-cold response when dating ? vis a vis the IEI-estp kind of thing i havent found being mentioned for EII's in the delta forum but i think i read it on some russian forum..
I'm sure I've registered my disagreement with these descriptors elsewhere on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali
I've never really been "spacy" or "passive" although when I was younger, I could probably have been described as "shy" (although really, it was more insecurity and self-consciousness). I've never "gone along". I am very willful in my own right, but am not comfortable with open confrontation. Passive resistance or opting out is more my tactic. Nonassertive, mm... I guess I'd have to cop to that. My normal default is inertia.
No one could ever have described me as agreeable.
These descriptors perhaps describe the enneagram 9 IEI or may be more SEI than IEI, imo.
EIIs are unstable when it comes about Se. They can be over aggressive and openly defiant. Weak Se doesn't make them passive; rather, it makes them to have little ability to control themselves. Strong Se is more about self control than control over others.
EIIs are far more reasonable than IEIs. IEIs are somewhat rebellious and find it hard to compromise. Si valuing quadras are far more agreegable than Se valuing quadras.
I am curious about your avatar. What does it mean mm?
A loved girl of mine. She lives in Russia. And if you find her a bit awkward, it's because she's ILI and expressiveness doesn't come naturally to her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christy B
here's a question, between nife and fine. For the infj, he uses extroverted intuition to intuit information about people, and then recreates them in introverted feeling..ie, he can internally SUBJECTIVELY feel the character, thought etc of people, group, situation. INFP on the other hand uses extroverted feeling - ie, they SUBJECTIVELY take in emotional information from an emotional circumstance (ie, any circumstances is seen in subjective emotional terms) and then try to intuit meaning/information out of it. is this correct?
INFjs expect others to follow rules and to behave properly and they let people know about this . INFps intuitively know what others feel and change their feelings by using :Fe:, in a subtle way
Hey I'll just like to hear from an EII's point of view, what is it like in your shoes? How is it like to be Fi-leading? Some practical examples instead of just theoretical stuff would be helpful :D
Same goes for IEI, I'd like to hear how it's like in your shoes and how Ni-leading feels like.
I can only speak for myself, so what I post may not be synonymous with other EII’s.
I’ve always been rather timid, shy and overly sensitive, which led me to be an avoidant. In other words, I’m frightened of being hurt, so I will avoid unnecessary, and sometimes necessary, situations where that could happen.
The type of hurt I’m referring to is not just in the extreme sense, but something as simple as the way a person addresses me; if I sense that they’re displeased with me, even if they actually aren‘t.
For the same reason, I tend to be precocious around people, particularly people I don’t know, walking on egg shells around them so I don’t offend or disturb them, thus both not hurting anyone else and also to protect myself. I tend to make myself ‘invisible’ by not doing, saying, or wearing anything that will draw attention, which is also part of my whole self-preservation mechanism
Because of this, every relation I’ve had has been initiated by the other party, as I don’t approach people unless they’re direct, somehow, that I’m “wanted“. The odd time that I will initiate someone is when I sense that they need someone, such as when they appear hurt/scared/lonely, etc, in which case I’ll tepidly attempt to interact with them.
I’ve always been a quite person, preferring to spend a lot of time on my own, unless I go somewhere unfamiliar, in which case I prefer to have someone else with me. I like when someone initiates doing something with me, like "Let's go do this" or "Do you want to go here with me?"
I’m pretty emotionally monotonous most of the time, I have my silly periods where I can be rather goofy and animated but that’s only when I feel that way, I can’t put on an act, so to speak, or even smile if I don’t feel like it. I rarely ever smile with my teeth showing, unless I’m laughing. I'm never flirtatious.
I have a hard time with hate or anything that I find immoral. When put in a position where someone does or says something that enrages me I will try to keep it inside, but it does spill out from time to time, like an eruption, but it only lasts for a few seconds at the most, followed by a feeling or remorse and grief, for both the way I’ve been treated and the way I reacted.
I really don’t know what else to write. If you have any questions feel free to ask :)
Haha thx for the reply. I could actually identify with quite a lot of that, especially the part about being sensitive to people's reactions towards me. However quite a lot of times when my mood and the general mood is high and happy, I do accidentally say stuff that just shouldn't be said. I tend to feel bad after that, but recover quite quickly though I do remember the incidents so as to try not to repeat it again.
I don't identify with the 'i'm never flirtatious' part. I actually enjoy flirting quite a bit (depends on your definition of flirting though, I'm generally not known as a flirter though I do it at times and rather enjoy it, especially with the right people).
The part about trying not to draw attention is similar in some aspects. I wouldn't normally do stuff or wear stuff that draws too much attention, but I actually enjoy quite a lot of attention. (But don't we all do lol.)
One thing that might not be typical of INFj's is that I actually enjoy a fair bit of violence. I liked the film '300' a lot, thought 'fight club' was cool, and really love to wrestle/play fight with my friends. I also like competitive sport except for those that requires hours and hours of training which I really hate. Which means I like competitive sport for leisure (does that make sense lol?) Perhaps this isn't type related, but it does imply that I do value some bit of Se. It's just that when I compare myself with my INtj brother he kinda hates these stuff (prolly due to Se polr).
Just wondering if you can identify with the differences between me and you, and if you could in anyway imagine an EII also embodying the behavioural traits that I just stated.
Looks like there's no one else contributing though :(
It'll be great if you (or anyone) could tell me how an SEE - EII supervision relationship will be like :D
Yeah, that's why I added the "disclaimer" about this just representing me, since I really don't want to go around stating that all EII's are like me, since that's just fallacious
My own views on flirting have to do partly with my own timidity as well as a dislike for manipulative forms of expression.
Maybe this is because I'm programed, so to speak, for Delta ST's whose own approach is centered around authenticity and tend to be rather emotionally sedate (although I'm sure Gamma Te's can relate to this as well)
I don't really relate to this. Violence in films/TV is not as off-putting, to me, as the EII profiles describe but I certainly don't seek it out, either.Quote:
One thing that might not be typical of INFj's is that I actually enjoy a fair bit of violence. I liked the film '300' a lot, thought 'fight club' was cool, and really love to wrestle/play fight with my friends. I also like competitive sport except for those that requires hours and hours of training which I really hate. Which means I like competitive sport for leisure (does that make sense lol?) Perhaps this isn't type related, but it does imply that I do value some bit of Se. It's just that when I compare myself with my INtj brother he kinda hates these stuff (prolly due to Se polr).
The best way of putting it, is, I dislike *glorified* violence that seems to be represented in a lot of Beta films like 300, Tarentino and Clint Eastwood films, mobster films, etc.
Movies that show violence but also show how awful it is I react well to, i.e Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator, Lord of The Rings, Glory, etc.
I don't particularly like competitive sports either, but than again I'm not particularly athletic. I also have horrible coordination and would end-up with bruises whenever I had to participate in them during gym; I didn't need to be bullied since I kicked my own butt :lol:
I like doing outdoor things where scores are not really kept, like biking, hiking, boating, etc.
Our views on the above are quite different but that's not to say we're not the same type, I think more information into the functions and intertype relations would be necessary for that.Quote:
Just wondering if you can identify with the differences between me and you, and if you could in anyway imagine an EII also embodying the behavioural traits that I just stated.
I relate to what you're describing. IEI and EII are very different, at least I couldn't make myself to consider IEI as my type. I can see how it might be sometimes confusing to distinguish between the two for someone who hasn't had much exposure to them, but you should be able to confidently recognize which one is your type.Quote:
Originally Posted by CeruleanFlame
one thing i think IEIs do is fantasize about "poetic justice", that is, giving wrongdoers what they deserve. I don't think EIIs fantasize about dealing out judgment to others, they're more live and let live. in this way (among others), i think IEIs are the "light humanitarians" and EIIs are the "heavy humanitarians".
i would love to see more on this topic; i'm not sure if i'm an EII or IEI. my dad is an EII for sure, and he is EXTREMELY conscientious. he also has no close friends because nobody's values are consistent with his.
here are Kohlberg's stages of moral development:
Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)
1. Obedience and punishment orientation
(How can I avoid punishment?)
2. Self-interest orientation
(What's in it for me?)
Level 2 (Conventional)
3. Interpersonal accord and conformity
(Social norms)
(The good boy/good girl attitude)
4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation
(Law and order morality)
Level 3 (Post-Conventional)
5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principles
(Principled conscience)
my dad is definitely a 6. he sees many of his adult friends as very base, and thinks ego (in the conventional, not socionics sense) to be one of the most destructive things on earth
hope this gave you some helpful insights!
message me if you have anything you think might tip the scale too, like i said i'm trying to figure out whether i'm EII or IEI also.
one other thing- my EII dad is 40 and he reads fantasy books all the time. i'm sure IEIs enjoy fantasy too but i thought i might add that, lol. i wish i could just have an IEI and an EII right here so i could god damn ask them whats up. they're so similar!
You are not EII
shut the fuck up maritsa
you dont know shit
Removed at User Request
Let's address question pirate, thank you...
How does an EII/IEI handle short term tasks as far as dedication? What I mean by that is say a friend asks for a hand in assistance with something.
EII will dedicate themselves on a timeline to complete tasks. Very deadline driven.
IEI will not so much notice the deadline of the task as with the time that it's taking to get there.
How much energy is the EII/IEI willing to exhaust to see to it that it gets done?
EII are absolute perfectionists, they will check for the tiny, microscopic details of something that they venture to do before they can feel comfortable with the task being done to a certain expectation of liking. Is a multitasker, they like to talk on the phone or do something else while working.
IEI will do a good amount of energy, but they will sometimes be distracted and lead to tangents and not stay completely focused. SEI however, is extremely focused.
How does an EII/IEI handle longer term tasks as far as dedication?
EII will break down long term tasks into weekly to do lists or monthly and quarterly goals so that each goal is a deadline. In a dedication to working out three times per week, EII needs will do it but during periods of depression, will drop out of the scene briefly and then get back up because they feel guilty that they did not accomplish the goal.
IEI is far more strategic and will look at the end result before pursuing the workability of the goal. If the goal becomes unmotivating with no real prospects, they will drop out.
There are a lot of aspects between the two that are to be differentiated...in their dress, manner of speaking, in their living, behavior, I will post some stuff to compare.
IEI does not hide their emotions, but restrains his emotions (purpose driven is the key here, they do this to observe it's effect on other individuals). Will share feelings to elicit comfort. Trys to forgive weaknesses. Is attracted to people that have force, drive, insightfulness, naturally if this force lends itself to the influence of his emotions. Tries to reveal or say, point out comical aspects of a situation. Smiles when anxious. Movements are plastic and even rhythmic. Chaos reins in his living quarters (usually not tidy and organzied). He uses his fine sense of humor to make them laugh, shake them up. Will scan people to get a sense of what they are feeling, he/she uses this knowledge to relate with others. Loves poetry and arts. In internet communication, will use eyebrow symbols, like squints and facila symbols like a frown and of the mouth, smirks and such.
EII buries their emotions deep dark corridors of their heart. (emotions come out on matter of sensitive topic, does not purposely display emotions to see effects in others.) Will share feelings not to elicit a response, but to gain understanding of the purpose and root of whether certain feelings are right or wrong to think of. Forgives weaknesses no trying necessary. Attracted to protective, grumbling emotions type of person who extingushes or soon tries to say something to wipe emotions away. Does not point out the comical aspect of a situation is either mildly flirty or blunt. Smiles when happy. Movement is fluid. Living quarters are organzied in what goes where, can not afford to be untidy. May from time to time, depending on the situation, find a joke to tell. Feel relations of people, he uses this to speak with his dual about such relations. Loves painting. To supress other people's emotions by not saying something at that time to make sure the other person does not display sad emotions or anger "His most important capability is his ability to adapt to his partner's emotions, to empathize, release emotional tension, to calm down." Will never spank a child. Extremely concientious. In internet communication, will use gestures of affection like hug, kiss, wink.
You are doing what Minde is doing, please also consider SEI, thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by tereg
oh and another thing- IEIs' dual seeking function is :Se:, so it gets their attention. because :Se: gets their own attention they often assume that, to get other people's attention, they should use :Se: themselves. this manifests as the IEI often touching the interlocutor's hand or arm while they lean in close to talk to them. i would guess the EII wouldn't be as comfortable doing this because they find :Se: deceiving and sometimes even affronting. they wouldn't want to rattle any cages, so to speak.
this was very telling; i thought it was the other way around! thankyouQuote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
my pleasure, I am happy to have shared this with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
This is very true and correct. I don't trust the nature of Se, it's rather painful, I don't know if it will slap, thrust, push, shove, snap or strike.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
i don't think so either, but what leads you to believe that? i'm curious. also do you think the things i think about EII are largely consistent with them? its hard to know; my dad doesn't really self-disclose very much, nor does any other EII i know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I say that because he would rather someone take him information then go after the information himself. Minde is like that as well. Information is not :Se:, it's one thing I can "hunt/search/research" freely.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
shorebreaker, this is an example of maritsas misguided logic and why she should not be taken seriously when it comes to anything related to socionics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
Yes, we, EII are very heavy humanitarians, serious, dedicated and highly concientious. I will never spank a child for misbehaving. Ego is very destructive indeed. I think your reference was wonderful. You can VI with me if you like to determine your type.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
who is this guy? is he trolling?Quote:
Originally Posted by thePirate
i would love that! how can i do it? pictures? i have a webcam on my macbook, but i don't know how to take videosQuote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
Would you actually type someone here on the forum as EII?
Possibly, but, it's not really unjustified. maritsa has been making some weird typings lately, and been pretty persistent about not actually listening to other people, so, a lot of the flak she get she deserves.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
No, he just likes to curse at me.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
You're too honest. :) Weird? Plynex's typing is not weird.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryu
This was probably like the first or second thread I ever made here at the16types, so cut me a little slack.
For the sake of completeness, I will answer the following questions.
I am very deadline driven, and I can get more accomplished when I have deadlines to meet. When things are more free form, I tend to struggle. I always notice deadlines, and I always strive to meet them if they are my responsibility, and even go so far as to stress myself out when I feel like I can't meet a deadline.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I identify with the EII definition. I cannot stand leaving things unfinished. I constantly fill my mind with things that need to get done, but I strive for quality of work rather than quantity of work. I pay too much attention to fine details, to a fault. I will not start a task unless I feel reasonably sure that the quality of what I do will be satisfactory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
There are aspects of IEI that seem to ping, but I resonate more with the EII description here. Most importantly is that when I do show emotion, it is only when I feel completely safe to do so, otherwise, I suppress my emotions. However, even when trying to suppress my emotions, I still wear my emotions on my sleeve. I don't show emotions to elicit reactions from people, I show emotions when I feel comfortable doing so because it feels more genuine and truthful to show what it is that I'm feeling. I hate smiling when I'm anxious. If I'm anxious, I look anxious. If I'm depressed, I look depressed. If I know that saying something would negatively affect another person's emotions, and I really care about that person, I will way more often than not choose to not say it. Social interaction to me is predicated on adaptation, responding, empathizing and connecting. I always feel like I have to respond to what's going on around me rather than making people respond to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I would then ask you to look at SEI. EII does not wear emotions on their sleeve. That is very clear with the Socioniko deffinition of EII, but Fe (meaning emotions) does wear their emotions on their sleeve as does IEI.Quote:
Originally Posted by tereg
What is the purpose of wearing emotions on your sleeve? When do you find it useful or not?
What do you mean by empathizing?
Empathizing for an EII means that an EII does not initiate contact with a stranger and will sit on a chair and watch people but by accident, an individual will wonder near an EII and start an off the wall conversation with her. An EII will feel the person's intention and inner makeup (honest or not? a pervert or not? a good person? a nice person?-without any thought these feelings flow in automatically). Then the EII will slowly adjust her mood to the appropriateness of the individual that is speaking with them based on feelings of one information and whether that information is trusted, and getting emotional impression of how the person feels about such things. An EII will never speak about gay rights, as an example with a person who makes a comment that gay people are not good because EII will not want to upset that individual's personal values and will not want to be so rash as to break off relations with that individual. Even though the person is not for gay rights, on a one on one basis, an EII will not be so forceful with her view point. An EII will address, in a croud of people, where she feels that blatant force will not be applied to her directly, the issue of gay rights being important and will then take up a position and support it, debating it and voicing her strong opinions.
Both IEI and EII will let people rome freely around forum sites and not direct or ask people to go here or there...SEI would. SEI are also very well organized.
:Fe: Extraverted ethic is also called Emotional Ethic.
This function reflects person's own emotions, his/her emotional, highly personal and passionate reaction to what is going on around. Types with this dominant functions are eloquent, often smiling, artistic, charming (but somewhat “fussy” and “too artistic”), can speak and persuade others, but they perceive situations too emotionally, too personally, and sometimes they “sink” in their own emotions, cannot calm down for long time.
Putting this function in the Second place means:
NeFi and SeFi
They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Humanist and Conservator with the dominant introverted ethic) for their strive for good relations with other people, very mild and comfortable manner of communication. However, there is a difference: both Lyricist and Mediator are emotionally active and even often try to awake emotions in other people. By contrast, Humanist and Conservator rather strive to suppress excessive emotions, to release other people from redundant, unnecessary emotions.
Release of other's emotions does not mean wearing my own emotions on my sleve, it means either not calling attention to my own emotions (for example, I have cried during many interactions with individuals on the forum, but no where have I posted that I have so no one knows), but Minde, I know for sure, likes to display her emotions and soon is comforted when someone and in this case it has been my dual, responds she calms down.
My dual does do a lot of wishful thinking, especially about Minde: "By his advice he helps his improvident dual to avoid many mistakes, the main of which is wishful thinking, especially about health and relations with people."
Of course, this is why I have to tell him things about people he can't see.
A good thing to remember is what do you want when your emotions are sparked?
A. To be comforted-do you display it, do you find that it attracts people's attention to you, when you have people's attention to your emotions do you calm down after the comfort?
B. To be left alone-do you hide it, do you find that calling attention to it only aggrivates you more.
if you choose A then that's Fe, which is calling people to attention of your emotions hence SEI or IEI
if you choose B then EII or ESI
The problem is that we all either want to call attention to our emotions and choose sometimes not to, but EII and ESI are exceptional about not calling or wearing their emotions on their sleeve.
Also, not being EII doesn't mean that you don't live your life by certain principles, but the principles that EII holds is universal, much more so then other's emphasis of personal perinciples.
I hate calling attention to myself.
For instance, I'm not in a very good mood today, and I'm finding it difficult to smile or be upbeat at all. People are telling me "Hey, you should smile more", which just makes me feel awkward.
If I attract more attention from feeling down, I feel even worse. I don't like dragging people along with me when I'm not feeling positive. Especially if they are in a positive mood and then they have to stop being in a positive mood because I'm not. Getting their attention does not calm me. So, when I'm in a bad mood, I try to distance myself from people and avoid social contact. Attracting attention in those circumstances only aggravates myself even more.
Why do you feel reluctant to VI?Quote:
Originally Posted by tereg
Do you hold global priciples, ideals of human relations, and what are they?
But you said you wear your heart on your sleeve. Calling attention is not to yourself, but to your feelings. Do you hate to call attention to your feelings?
I humbly submit to Tereg and Minde that trying to 'reason' with Maritsa is appearing to be relatively ineffectual. Please be careful about the amount of energy you expend in dealing with her.
I feel like 'taking her seriously' is only encouraging her to believe her methods of going about things deserved to be taken seriously.
This kind of stuff is display of emotion (Fe) and calling attention to your feelings by other:
:-/ , :oops: ,
Just look back at Minde's posts and yours and start lining the Fe up and you can see what I mean by calling attention to Fe.
Here is one of your posts, please read it:
"I don't naturally take criticism well. My natural and initial reaction is to interpret criticism as a statement about my character. That I have failed somehow. It hurts in a way that is hard to explain, like almost something irrecoverable or irreconcilable. I'm not angry at the person issuing it, I'm more angry at myself for allowing something like that to happen."
Anger pain feeling, marid of colors embarrassment of blushing tones.
If you want, I will find your posts for you and put them all here and hilight these things.
:Fe:
This function reflects person's own emotions, his/her emotional, highly personal and passionate reaction to what is going on around. Types with this dominant functions are eloquent, often smiling, artistic, charming (but somewhat “fussy” and “too artistic”), can speak and persuade others, but they perceive situations too emotionally, too personally, and sometimes they “sink” in their own emotions, cannot calm down for long time.
You are too much, and you can't even remain objective. Please stop challenging me, if you have something to add to the effect of the information that I am trying to produce, either do so or don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryu
I feel everything that any other person feels and probably much more deeply, but I don't say it. Like, I feel angry, upset, embarrased, I feel, I feel I feel. NO
I say things like please stop because you will upset me, which is trying to prompt individuals to refrain from certain actions that will produce emotion to come out. Which is, what Ryu is doing at me now.
If you dualized you will begin to see me but you're just so much in fantasy about these two individuals here being EII. He and minde are the same, identicals, both at 9w1 both are unwilling or concerned to VI; There is nothing about Socioniko description of EII that does not match me to the T. and nothing about our role as duals that does not either, yet when you read Minde's comments on the personality types, you begin to wonder.
Tereg, here's :Si: in your post:
"A new version was recently released. I will add it this weekend.
It was removed because I was noticing some unpleasant aesthetic effects."
:Si: This kind of sensing is rather passive, it focuses on getting as more pleasant feelings as possible, on reduction of quantity of unnecessary motions, on the quality and functionality of work. People with this function as dominant do not like to argue (if they began – it means that something VERY serious happened). They are often efficient at work that requires attention to small details, etc. They like intellectuals, like new ideas, because these ideas make their life more diverse, but also ridicule intellectuals for their “impractical approach”.
SEI
1. He is amicable, always appears optimistic and in a good spirits. He does not impose his will on others, hiding his real feelings. He is always equally warm, caring, smiling. He does not like to ask and moreover to demand favors, and strives to satisfy his needs through his own efforts.
2. He appreciates all the facets of life, finely experiences nature and the arts. He is capable of remembering and reproducing emotions once experienced. Ayvazovsky painted his seascapes in a room with dark red walls and windows looking out in the opposite direction of the sea. He loves pleasures and knows how to bestow them —an artist in loving.
3. Attentive and considerate. Tries not to infringe on others' comfort. His very quick and consciously controlled emotional reactions aim to test or alter the emotions of the others. This results in many jokes—if they are out of turn he immediately takes them back. He is permanently in the process of emotional creativity, searching for the most effective ways to activate his partner. With exceptional ardor he manipulates the moods of his friends and relatives.
4. Peacemaker. He dislikes to quarrel, say "no", break undesired acquaintances—this is why he avoids sticky people. He needs a partner, who under certain circumstances will also not quarrel, but just slam the door and leave. This is just how his dual, Don Quixote, will act. It's noteworthy that Alexander Dumas (the great French novelist) picked Ida Ferrier out of the many of his mistresses, because she kept him at a longer leash than the others.
5. Who needs what? He remarks people's needs, what motivates them, enjoys persuading everyone and winning them over to his side. But he needs his dual in order to know, whom he must convince and of what, because his dual possesses insights into potential capabilities of people, ideas, and undertakings.
6. He does not like to make people aware of his existence while there is no need of him. He strives neither to stand out as an advanced man nor to lag too far behind. He does not like to compete, shows initiative only on his own "territory". He prefers that in his family initiative and responsibility belong to his partner, even if he is the one to carry everything out. An interesting fact: before Alexander Dumas The Father began writing "The Three Musketeers", "The Count of Monte-Cristo" and many other books, his secret co-author Max wrote their drafts.
7. "A tender calf is nursed by two cows." When he feels lousy, he is compelled to hide somewhere and recuperate. His mood is spoiled making him incapable of manipulating [changing or influencing people's feelings] people, without this communication seems meaningless to him.
I am don't with this Tereg, I have typed both you and Minde as SEI and so far, like I have said, there are non other EII on this site except for myself. You, Minde and one other individual on this site, are all three 9w1 in enneagram, PEACEMAKER, both in Socionics, MBTI, Enneagram and real life.
I am sorry that when you read your own description of your type that you can't see it, but being objective and taking a look at yourself, to realize the ego, will help you in that process.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
True. As an :Si: I do focus on efficiency, avoid conflict, and enjoy out-of-the-box thinkers. I'm not too wrapped around the "small details," since they tend to take care of themselves, but otherwise, Maritsa is right.
"Monotonous chores" are deadly for the SLI Maritsa. Better rethink that concept. Worst job I've ever seen... the workers at the Campbell's Soup factory standing before a converyor belt of vegetable chuncks rolling by. She has a vacumn hose and sucks ups the bad chunks. I could last for maybe an hour at that job before I would suck my eyeballs out.
Thank you Cyrano, you're very sweet. True, monotonous chores should be removed. Small details does apply to SEI better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrano
Just to clarify, I never said I was unwilling to do it. Being silent =/= unwilling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
In due time.
Because your type does not like to argue as I do not also, we look so meek and fragile and very delicate. You confuse our duals into thinking you're INFj, but please remember that in the long run the way the fuctions come together, you would not want to be with an ESTj because that would be a relation of supervision where the ESTj always has an upper hand in matters and that would not lend you to a comfortable relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by tereg
ESTj constantly watches over ISFp, even though you will feel that control, because of your non-argumentative nature, will not say or do anything about it. And if my dual here, had some sense, he would leave Minde alone for a while.
ESTj does see Minde as interesting and capable, right? That's what supervisors do, but that only increases ESTj to want to change ("work with them") ISFp to what they want, which is their dual.
http://www.socionics.com/rel/sp.htm
Duality and dualization is not "working with someone" (as would be in relations of supervision) to realize certain aspects or things about themselves or "change". Duals come together and quickly, if they are open and receptive to one another, start reading each others feelings and thoughts and dualize.
EII love to proactively help people to understand themselves and their relationships with other human beings; you have over 4000 posts and I don't see you offering any moral outlook as well as assiting individuals with any certain counseling related issues, so it seems all very personal and narrow to you. EII is also not clickish with regard to holding friends and friendships for certain activites or hangouts. I love everyone together for everything.
i think a facet of the IEI that isn't as present in the EII is their tendency to self-disclose to establish rapport. EIIs (as i understand it) like it when other dislcose, but they themselves aren't as comfortable expressing their deep convictions.
if my dad is a textbook example of an EII, they are VERY mild people and will rarely say a harsh word to someone even if they don't like them. they will be congenial, but they will never act like someone they're not. IEIs use their :Fe: to act differently around other people (i certainly do).
he has also said to me that he gets a lot of satisfaction out of helping other people
this is definitely suggestive of an EII too! my neighbor, a girl i grew up with, is an EII. i talked with her mom the other day, and she said her daughter was always true to her feelings as a child; other children would ask her if she wanted to play, and she might say something like, "well i was going to go read a book." it didn't occur to her that the kid liked her, wanted to get to know her, or even that it might be inappropriate to say that, she was just being honest. with an EII, i think, what you see is what you get.Quote:
Originally Posted by tereg
their :Fe: is their opposing function, but it doesn't develop until later in life, i think, so EII children will likely show blithe unawareness of the emotional connotations of what they say until they develop their :Fe:. once :Fe: is developed, though, it constantly nags at them to be consistent with social norms so they don't upset anyone.
Thank goodness someone noticed. I don't curse. Does your father? I know for sure that Tereg has cursed before. "Sh*t" is the only word I can say.Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebreaker
This kind of talk is starting to make me sick... I mean, this is so illogical that it leaves me speechless for argument. Cursing is a situational thing, and that's all I have to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
Not for humanitarian EII!!! You can think about that and look back at my previous posts;Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobo
No thanks...Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33