Differences between ISFj-ESI and ISFp-SEI

What stands out the most?

You mean when you observe them IRL?

ISFps are more jokey, the ISFj-Fis are more serious.

During longer conversations, ISFps try to keep the conversation flowing, avoiding heavy moments and disagreements; ISFjs will be more inclined to exchange actual information. The difference between IP emotion-creating and IJ construct-creating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

The difference between IP emotion-creating and IJ construct-creating.

---

truth

ISFp tries to make people feel emotionally comfortable, ISFj may withhold the emotional security other people crave. I.E., my father is an ISFp (I think), and he's almost always light-hearted and jovial with people. He makes the emotional atmosphere a pleasant, comfortable one. My grandmother was an ISFj (I think), and she never tried to make the atmosphere light and pleasant. Especially if she thought someone was in the wrong in some way. My father walks away from conflict and angry feelings. My grandmother stood her ground a lot more. ISFp happier, softer expression. ISFj, often cold, impenetrable, or look like smelled something a little bad. ISFp, big smiles, big laughs. ISFj, smaller smiles, more dignified laughter.

ISFP's are totally relaxed, even lazy. That's their most obvious trait I would say.

I don't know enough ISFJ's to make a sound statement.

An ISFp is more liable to appear like a hippy, or someone who is totally hedonistic, and generally concerned about having a "cool time" (Si, Fe creative). An ISFj is more liable to appear like someone with a huge stick up their ass, a snob, an "asshole" who will do whatever she wants to get her way (Se creative).

An ISFj is likely to talk shit about how bad someone is behind their back, particularly their flaws.
An ISFp is more likely to talk nice about people, almost all the time. The ISFp will more likely focus on their inability to make someone happy or "properly give care" to the situation.



Also - IME, and perhaps not always, but....

Quote:

---

ISFps are always talking about relationships, and usually how bad their own are sucking right now, for whatever reason -- as in, why they are not happy with them.
ISFjs don't talk about their relationships much, and stick to informational bits, although they will readily give demerits against what they see as negative character traits.

ISFps seem much more frequently to change relationships as well (IME).

---

The above is much more based on individual experience with individual people, so it is less to do with types as a whole, than the above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danielle

ISFp tries to make people feel emotionally comfortable, ISFj may withhold the emotional security other people crave. I.E., my father is an ISFp (I think), and he's almost always light-hearted and jovial with people. He makes the emotional atmosphere a pleasant, comfortable one. My grandmother was an ISFj (I think), and she never tried to make the atmosphere light and pleasant. Especially if she thought someone was in the wrong in some way. My father walks away from conflict and angry feelings. My grandmother stood her ground a lot more. ISFp happier, softer expression. ISFj, often cold, impenetrable, or look like smelled something a little bad. ISFp, big smiles, big laughs. ISFj, smaller smiles, more dignified laughter.

---

excellent, right on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UDP

An ISFp is more liable to appear like a hippy, or someone who is totally hedonistic, and generally concerned about having a "cool time" (Si, Fe creative). An ISFj is more liable to appear like someone with a huge stick up their ass, a snob, an "asshole" who will do whatever she wants to get her way (Se creative).

An ISFj is likely to talk shit about how bad someone is behind their back, particularly their flaws.
An ISFp is more likely to talk nice about people, almost all the time. The ISFp will more likely focus on their inability to make someone happy or "properly give care" to the situation.



Also - IME, and perhaps not always, but....

Quote:

---

ISFps are always talking about relationships, and usually how bad their own are sucking right now, for whatever reason -- as in, why they are not happy with them.
ISFjs don't talk about their relationships much, and stick to informational bits, although they will readily give demerits against what they see as negative character traits.

ISFps seem much more frequently to change relationships as well (IME).

---

The above is much more based on individual experience with individual people, so it is less to do with types as a whole, than the above.

---

and you no longer think you're alpha? *shrugs*

ISFjs don't talk about relationships only when they're going bad. Watch it as a signal.

ISFjs can be loners when out of their main social setting. They can stand long periods - I mean, one week - of lack of social interaction. They can be dowright snobbish also in their choices of who to talk. I haven't met many ISFjs with a "stick up their ass", I think they just stand out more. The low-key, happier, family-oriented kind of ISFj is more easily overlooked. The first one is stereotypically cold, the second one can *resemble* an ISFp in many ways because they are open with their laughter/etc. Only, you will often hear the IJ innuendo "why do I suck so much". That's a good tell-tale.

ISFps generally are far more social, they easly get to know new people. That's the Fp vs Fj emotivism vs constructivism. ISFps can have an equally developed willpower as an ISFj, not type related. ISFps have a wider circle of friends. ISFp's have also a wider wardrobe, usually. They don't like strong physical exercise - for example, when playing football they always avoid running if not necessary. They're generally very relaxed and have a very steady work rythm, something I truly envy. ISFp males are also pretty good with girls, usually.

Comparisons: ISFjs are more physically active, and responsive to invitations at being physically active. ISFjs are far more critical of fashion than ISFps. ISFjs are generally rather worrisome when they lack the right amount of Te and Ni. ISFps never seem to be worrisome to me. Neither type is particularly inclined to behind-the-back gossip, when healthy. They are both IxFx though, so you will hear both discussing the relationships between people. They like to share their analysis of the situations.

Both types have hedonistic streaks, but ISFps will rarely feel guilty about it, whereas an ISFj will worry that she's going to miss the next day due to the hungover. Generally, ISFjs have better grades than ISFps. ISFps more easily though find their way professionally, whereas ISFjs are far pickier and idealistic (Fe doesn't seek Te advice, whereas Fi does).

A striking difference in first impression is that most of the time ISFjs can appear thinking types, whereas ISFps rarely do. This is the role function speaking, of course. Beware that thinking type doesn't mean cold.

Quote:

---

An ISFp is more likely to talk nice about people, almost all the time.

---

Not entirely true.
I know an ISFp who is always whining about something, even people. When he's with me, he always telling me how bad his day was, how his boss was in the office today, and that gave him stress, etc. And he kinda expects me to find solutions to his problems. Most annoying. :?
Of course not all ISFps are like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mea

Quote:

---

An ISFp is more likely to talk nice about people, almost all the time.

---

Not entirely true.
I know an ISFp who is always whining about something, even people. When he's with me, he always telling me how bad his day was, how his boss was in the office today, and that gave him stress, etc. And he kinda expects me to find solutions to his problems. Most annoying. :?
Of course not all ISFps are like that.

---

Yeah those are unhealthy type trait, not really type related.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mea

Quote:

---

An ISFp is more likely to talk nice about people, almost all the time.

---

Not entirely true.
I know an ISFp who is always whining about something, even people. When he's with me, he always telling me how bad his day was, how his boss was in the office today, and that gave him stress, etc. And he kinda expects me to find solutions to his problems. Most annoying. :?
Of course not all ISFps are like that.

---

lol, yes, i agree. i know an ISFp who is very very much like this. lots of discussions of roommate problems and such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

ISFjs don't talk about relationships only when they're going bad. Watch it as a signal.

ISFjs can be loners when out of their main social setting. They can stand long periods - I mean, one week - of lack of social interaction. They can be dowright snobbish also in their choices of who to talk. I haven't met many ISFjs with a "stick up their ass", I think they just stand out more. The low-key, happier, family-oriented kind of ISFj is more easily overlooked. The first one is stereotypically cold, the second one can *resemble* an ISFp in many ways because they are open with their laughter/etc. Only, you will often hear the IJ innuendo "why do I suck so much". That's a good tell-tale.

ISFps generally are far more social, they easly get to know new people. That's the Fp vs Fj emotivism vs constructivism. ISFps can have an equally developed willpower as an ISFj, not type related. ISFps have a wider circle of friends. ISFp's have also a wider wardrobe, usually. They don't like strong physical exercise - for example, when playing football they always avoid running if not necessary. They're generally very relaxed and have a very steady work rythm, something I truly envy. ISFp males are also pretty good with girls, usually.

Comparisons: ISFjs are more physically active, and responsive to invitations at being physically active. ISFjs are far more critical of fashion than ISFps. ISFjs are generally rather worrisome when they lack the right amount of Te and Ni. ISFps never seem to be worrisome to me. Neither type is particularly inclined to behind-the-back gossip, when healthy. They are both IxFx though, so you will hear both discussing the relationships between people. They like to share their analysis of the situations.

Both types have hedonistic streaks, but ISFps will rarely feel guilty about it, whereas an ISFj will worry that she's going to miss the next day due to the hungover. Generally, ISFjs have better grades than ISFps. ISFps more easily though find their way professionally, whereas ISFjs are far pickier and idealistic (Fe doesn't seek Te advice, whereas Fi does).

A striking difference in first impression is that most of the time ISFjs can appear thinking types, whereas ISFps rarely do. This is the role function speaking, of course. Beware that thinking type doesn't mean cold.

---

These are very good observations -- not sure if I agree with all of it, but over 90% at least.

Any ideas? It's just my Dad seems like an ISFp, perhaps... but that's my dual, and up until recently we've always argued. Also, ISFps, as friends, started out well, but then always we both move on as something goes wrong and I don't feel that whole comfort thing, and hmm... I'm just wondering whether my typing is wrong. I'm not the best at it!

Its possible.

Tell us more about your Father and some your Isfp friends you have falling outs with.

Quote:

---

What are the main differences between ISFj/ISFp?

---

LIEs and ILEs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by confused84

Its possible.

Tell us more about your Father and some your Isfp friends you have falling outs with.

---

Dunno, my Dad didn't live up to my standards, i.e. wanting to better himself, having nice habbits/ good public front, sounds shallow, but that's the way it was!

My friends, well we got along so well, I remember thinking about two of them:
a) Okay, that may sound weird to others, but it doesn't bother me at all! Why do I not want to change this person?
b) Wow, that's the most effective shopping trip I've ever had, lol, we were so efficient, I'd never noticed that about shopping with anyone else.

But on both occassions I felt let down, they moved on, and I being my loyal self thought, these are good finds, I will stick by them. I don't understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joy

LIEs and ILEs

---

Right...

I find that the easiest way to sort out J/P is static vs. dynamic. I find this relatively hard to do over the net, but reasonably easy in person after some exposure.

SEIs (ISFps) will focus on the manner in which things are expressed and done. They have a very "flowing" kind of behavior, and seem to be attuned to what is happening, although sometimes they ironically appear detached. They only rarely seem expansive, and tend to be more aware of the way they and others are feeling and how they are experiencing things, rather than what things cause those feelings or what objects define their experience. Although they are capable of the latter, they tend to avoid it too much because it is kinda boring to them. They tend to be involved in activities where the manner and style of performance is important, and attempt to create harmony in most things. They are typically receptive to ideas that help them expand their awareness and provide possibilities for them. They are angered and frustrated by a focus on work processes and extended cause and effect.

ESIs (ISFjs) are aware primarily of the attitudes of others and the objects that cause certain attitudes and responses. To me, their overall behavior and movement appears more "angular", although this is highly subjective. They can be very direct when provoked or convicted, but usually seem polite and self-assured in a nonchalant manner, as opposed to the more spontaneous "warmth" of the SEI. They usually describe things in terms of orientation toward an object, person, or goal. Though they can be expressive and understand emotional displays well, they get tired of it, and prefer more to find the inner feelings of attraction and repulsion. They often have a strong regard for loyalty, and know how to exact loyalty in the right conditions, and excite people to an ethical goal. They are enchanted by a solid understanding of the ways in which things can be accomplished and the manner in which events lead to one another. They are skeptical of and frustrated by ideas that seem to have little basis in reality, and little application to ethical goals. They are often found in activities that require a great deal of consistency and devotion, and require quick and pragmatic ethical judgements. It is my hypothesis that they invented accounting.

I hope this helps. It takes a while to get a "feel" for it, and even then it's not perfect. I know I'm not. Good luck!

ella, I think your typing is right, just based off of your style of writing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JRiddy

I find that the easiest way to sort out J/P is static vs. dynamic. I find this relatively hard to do over the net, but reasonably easy in person after some exposure.

SEIs (ISFps) will focus on the manner in which things are expressed and done. They have a very "flowing" kind of behavior, and seem to be attuned to what is happening, although sometimes they ironically appear detached. They only rarely seem expansive, and tend to be more aware of the way they and others are feeling and how they are experiencing things, rather than what things cause those feelings or what objects define their experience. Although they are capable of the latter, they tend to avoid it too much because it is kinda boring to them. They tend to be involved in activities where the manner and style of performance is important, and attempt to create harmony in most things. They are typically receptive to ideas that help them expand their awareness and provide possibilities for them. They are angered and frustrated by a focus on work processes and extended cause and effect.

ESIs (ISFjs) are aware primarily of the attitudes of others and the objects that cause certain attitudes and responses. To me, their overall behavior and movement appears more "angular", although this is highly subjective. They can be very direct when provoked or convicted, but usually seem polite and self-assured in a nonchalant manner, as opposed to the more spontaneous "warmth" of the SEI. They usually describe things in terms of orientation toward an object, person, or goal. Though they can be expressive and understand emotional displays well, they get tired of it, and prefer more to find the inner feelings of attraction and repulsion. They often have a strong regard for loyalty, and know how to exact loyalty in the right conditions, and excite people to an ethical goal. They are enchanted by a solid understanding of the ways in which things can be accomplished and the manner in which events lead to one another. They are skeptical of and frustrated by ideas that seem to have little basis in reality, and little application to ethical goals. They are often found in activities that require a great deal of consistency and devotion, and require quick and pragmatic ethical judgements. It is my hypothesis that they invented accounting.

I hope this helps. It takes a while to get a "feel" for it, and even then it's not perfect. I know I'm not. Good luck!

---

Mmm yea I agree with this. I think accounting is perhaps slighlty more ISTj, but I'm not certain. Perhaps just creative-Se. In any case, boring.

SEI's are softer and more outwardly friendly/jovial.

Ask Kam :o

She is right. I am ISFp, and my mother is ISFj.

I enjoy making and hearing a lot of jokes. My mother never has made a joke and she laughs about normal everyday happenings, while I laugh at things that are more far-out and unreal. That is the Ne PoLR in action. Random(me) vs. Static/Normal(her) I am more smiley and jovial than her. I rarely yell about anything, but if I do, I scream and just get furious. My mother enjoys to raise her voice if she is challenged in any way.

She hates to discuss sex, homosexuality, or anything like that because discussing such topics out loud is just "bad". I see no problem with it, because sex and homosexuality are real topics. Very very very moralistic woman, she isn't afraid to voice her opinion on issues of morality. I have seen a lot of Fi PoLR from ILE's and I know my mother would lay the smackdown on them if she heard them. I'm more accepting of people overall also. I will make friends with everyone, my mother chooses her friends very very cautiously.

Anything else, I'm here. I know my mom very well.

Thanks guys! You have all painted a better picture / "feel" for the differences, it has helped, and I think I understand who is what now - explains a few things! Thank you all muchly :)

ESI's are extremely playful, some of the most playful people I've known. However, you have to be close to them in order to see it, generally speaking.

SEIs don't care about business, ESIs love the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Kamangir is right. ISFjs are all dead serious. We only laugh about dishes and laundry and driving to the dentist. Nothing else is fit for even a smile. :( We would never tell our kids that we had just traveled through a wormhole and were on the opposite side of the country when they ask us how much longer to our destination. We would never make up silly songs or dances, or do handstands in our living rooms, or allow our kids to ride bicycles inside the house on a rainy day. We yell about everything, and never joke around. We especially do not make up elaborate metaphors with our friends. We shun everyone who is not up to the proper standards. Serious and stoic, thy name is ISFj.

---

Just in case anyone missed this, I think Diana made this post during opposite day.

Under no exaggeration, Diana's description of ESI is so much like my mom that I never noticed she was mocking me.

It is a very good profile of a middle aged ESI, one with 3 kids, all born after 35.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joy

LIEs and ILEs

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EllaC

Right...

---

:lol:

I think Joy has the right idea; she simply hasn't explained it clearly enough.

Essentially, what people have completely missed is the fact that ESIs and SEIs are in opposing quadras. ESIs value the exact opposite of what SEIs value. They are as good as each other at the same things (Se, Si, Fe and Fi); they merely value completely different things.

Some people like this style of explanation. Others prefer it if you "just give me the differences in real-life terms - no theoretical crap". If you like the former, ask me (or Joy or Expat or anyone else who follows this style of reasoning) more about the differences and I'd/we'd be glad to tell you. If you like the latter, just carry on what you're doing; you'll get plenty of responses.

The main difference between ISFps and ISFjs is that the former jump out at me whereas I never seem to notice the latter.

Oh, you wanted something objective? Whoops, sorry!

Pam (SEI) vs. Angela (ESI) from The Office (US Version)

But most ESIs are no where near as rigid and mean as Angela is, so don't get the wrong idea. This show, in my estimation, really contrasts the Alpha Values (Michael, Jim, Pam) with Gamma Values (Dwight, Angela, Jan)

I was wondering if anyone could give me the fundamental differences between a SEI and an ESI? Being an ILE this can be concerning because one is my dual and the other is my conflictor. I would love to know how to identify each and even some similarities could be useful, I suppose. Also, what exactly does a relationship of conflict look like? And finally what do SEIs think of ESIs? I'm concerned because I believe I'm in a relationship with a SEI, but I'm not completely sure.

ESI in my experience:
Tend to bottle feelings while keeping a restrained cryptic manner.
Tend to care about punishments and discipline, even when joking.
They're also big on devotion and feel that they give more than they receive.
Quick to react to emergencies / seems to always expect an emergency.
Prefer the time-tested, old, familiar things in life.
Shy around unfamiliar people or in unfamiliar situations, have a dominating presence otherwise.
Realists / materialistic(when not being frugal).
Can be dogmatic and boastful.
Secretly romantic/poetic.

Conflictor relationships = relationships of ingratitude & suppression

You're either too desperately lonely and/or in love to not care about dating your conflictor whose a bitch who wants to conform your ways and thinking, or then you're dating someone who is not your conflictor. You might be also dating Allie in which case you should not worry about dating with your conflictor but rather focus on being too cool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold

Tend to care about punishments and discipline, even when joking.

---

Generally untrue for those born past the 60s...

Quote:

---

Realists / materialistic(when not being frugal).

---

How can they be both frugal and materialistic? D:

IME ISFjs would kind of like spending some money but generally hold back as much as they can. Males ESI can act differently, more showoff-y.

I forgot where (i'll post it if i find it) but Aushra described SEI/IEI as the "warmest" of the socion, and ESI/EII as the "coldest" of the socion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crispy

I forgot where (i'll post it if i find it) but Aushra described SEI/IEI as the "warmest" of the socion, and ESI/EII as the "coldest" of the socion.

---

From an ENTp POV maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

From an ENTp POV maybe.

---

I wanna hear ENTj POV on ESIs and SEIs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by octo

Luckily both Aushra and the question asker are apparently ILE!

---

OMG REALLY???

It's very easy, if you are really ILE: an SEI will listen endlessly to your theoretical Ne-ramblings, and give you the impression they understand and agree, even when they don't. Your ramblings will be met with disapproval by ESIs, and at best they will argue with you and constantly disagree with most of what you say, opposing it with their own perspective, which you think is rather narrow-minded, outdated and makes you feel they haven't understood a single bit of what you said, that they didn't get the point.

ETA: another thing, SEIs, although not as expressive as ESEs, might laugh boisterous when they think something is very funny. ESIs are more likely to chuckle, or just smile, not even baring their teeth.

Fi value is more about emotional comfort and Fe is more about humor and not taking the “truth” to heart even if the truth is blunt and very offensive to some; take me for instance, I help out an ILE by giving her business and referring a dual client to her; she could have said, “thanks for being so considerate;” instead what she told me was “well, it's always best to recognize when you're in way over your head and to consider that someone else can cover that role better.” I thought, “really?” that's how you say “thanks?” that hurts my feelings because there was not thanks in that; it was in fact, telling me something about myself that I already knew and because I knew that I acted in the most rational sense which was to refer her and I didn't get a thanks but a criticism of me.

There are so many commonalities between SEI and ESI; both "monitor" or "mediate" their future and idea oriented partners. They both weigh the pros and cons of their partner's suggestions and ideas. They are both Sensory types so both earthen these grand ideas. Both dress well and can seem like they are concerned about their fashion or style of the time, in general. Both are family and kids oriented and both are "home-keepers" in the everyday sense of the word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

It's very easy, if you are really ILE: an SEI will listen endlessly to your theoretical Ne-ramblings, and give you the impression they understand and agree, even when they don't. Your ramblings will be met with disapproval by ESIs, and at best they will argue with you and constantly disagree with most of what you say, opposing it with their own perspective, which you think is rather narrow-minded, outdated and makes you feel they haven't understood a single bit of what you said, that they didn't get the point.

ETA: another thing, SEIs, although not as expressive as ESEs, might laugh boisterous when they think something is very funny. ESIs are more likely to chuckle, or just smile, not even baring their teeth.

---

Yes, and that may be because an ESI expects pragmatic, concrete actions. ESI are "very exacting of others. And no one gets away with any irresponsibility."

SEI are more socially expansive than ESI. I, or an EII, unlike and ESI, won't clean to the point of sterilizing the home. They have immense amount of energy that they can lend to tasks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crispy

I forgot where (i'll post it if i find it) but Aushra described SEI/IEI as the "warmest" of the socion, and ESI/EII as the "coldest" of the socion.

---

No, it was something along the lines that Introversion makes Logic colder but Ethics warmer, or something like that. For instance EII is warmer than IEE but LII is colder than ILE. I don't remember exactly but it was about Logic colder and Ethics warmer, certainly Fi-Base are not the coldest of the Socion.

Aw maritsa. You always have a way for words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa33

Yes, and that may be because an ESI expects pragmatic, concrete actions. ESI are "very exacting of others. And no one gets away with any irresponsibility."

---

That's not an accurate characterization for a horizontal relationship - how do you think ESIs could get along with :Te: dominants by being "very exacting"?. If you have an ESI boss or neurotic mother, that might be true, even though they tendentially act in such a way when they are stressed and insecure as to what to do next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Ineffable

certainly Fi-Base are not the coldest of the Socion.

---

Who is? ;)

Cold to whom?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aquagraph

I wanna hear ENTj POV on ESIs and SEIs.

---

On surface impressions, ESI and SEI can seem similar IME. Both tend to be approachable, somewhat warm, playful, etc. The term 'quasi-identical' can be taken literally in this respect.

Differences become markedly salient once psychological distance is tightened, however. Invariably, a lot of what I discuss tends to be more philosophical in nature—including observations of people, generalizations about life, history, etc. SEIs usually don't have a lot of patience for this sort of thing, at least coming from me. But ESIs will tend to find it interesting.

Oh true. SEIs I've known are like hmm and just ignore it, or else they don't know what to make of it like it's too abstract. I guess that's what being :Si: dominant does to you and why they need ILEs to spell principles out for them. On the contrary ESIs seem to go along with whatever it is and help generalize in their own way, that's part of their charm too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Oh true. SEIs I've known are like hmm and just ignore it, or else they don't know what to make of it like it's too abstract. I guess that's what being :Si: dominant does to you and why they need ILEs to spell principles out for them. On the contrary ESIs seem to go along with whatever it is and help generalize in their own way, that's part of their charm too.

---

Now explain mune the ostensible SEI being a philosophile, or my SLI chum having a philosophy degree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Mune as in EII mune?

---

I haven't scrutinized him too closely but he says he's SEI, and I have zero doubts about my SLI friend's type. He's a bit like me in various ways except he's rather more pointedly sadistic, he likes mountain climbing, and he'd would rather kill babies than eat them.

Quote:

---

I wasn't being overly specific anyway, I think well-balanced individuals of any type can be.

---

And I am being specific to point out that your generalization stands a fair chance of being flawed, which you've shown the good sense to concede.

Mune as in EII mune? I wasn't being overly absolute, I think well-balanced individuals of any type can be. Just I tend to see Ni-agendas taking this philosophical openness toward the unknown more than I do Ne-dual seekers, since Ne is often based on more objective conceptions, like SLI philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer is based around concrete qualia. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/au...hopenhauer.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

overly absolute

---

^ Nice one. I hope the next edit bears even more fantastic fruit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

I haven't scrutinized him too closely but he says he's SEI,

---

Except that he doesn't know much about how ExIs actually are? Maybe if we hold hands, go back to basics and read Jung. I have no problem with yours or his disagreement on the matter, just no info I take into consideration to my generalization on SEIs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

and I have zero doubts about my SLI friend's type. He's a bit like me in various ways except he's rather more pointedly sadistic, he likes mountain climbing, and he'd would rather kill babies than eat them.

---

Ah ok, I wasn't implying he's not SLI because he's interested in philisophy. I think logical types will show more interest in such technical designations on average anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

And I am being specific to point out that your generalization stands a fair chance of being flawed, which you've shown the good sense to concede.

---

Flawed is such a general word. Also saying I agree with Ashton, so something you might take up with him too since you're mirror chums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Except that he doesn't know much about how ExIs actually are? Maybe if we hold hands, go back to basics and read Jung. I have no problem with yours or his disagreement on the matter, just no info I take into consideration to my generalization on SEIs.

---

That's a poor dodge. ExI* isn't Si-base/-ego and you know that that isn't the point of dissent. Also, if you missed it in the catbox, mune says he'll probably add his two cents to this thread tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Also saying I agree with Ashton, so something you might take up with him since you're chums.

---

Dude, show some dignity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Ah ok, I wasn't implying he's not SLI because he's interested in philisophy. I think logical types will show more interest in such technical designations on average anyway.

---

Puffery. You said quite clearly in reference not just to SEIs but to Si-bases in general, i.e. SLIs too:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Oh true. SEIs I've known are like hmm and just ignore it, or else they don't know what to make of it like it's too abstract. I guess that's what being :Si: dominant does to you and why they need ILEs to spell principles out for them. On the contrary ESIs seem to go along with whatever it is and help generalize in their own way, that's part of their charm too.

---

But we can let you halfway off your petard because your original argument is anecdotal, so it's possible you've yet to encounter SEIs or Si-base types who can plunge in the abstraction pool without inflatable swimmy-wings.

Quote:

---

Flawed is such a general word.

---

Walk it off, guy. Walk it off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

and he'd would rather kill babies than eat them.

---

Yeah, reasonable over resolute, clearly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

That's a poor dodge. ExI* isn't Si-base/-ego and you know that that isn't the point of dissent. Also, if you missed it in the catbox, mune says he'll probably add his two cents to this thread tomorrow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Dude, show some dignity.

---

Your point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Puffery. You said quite clearly in reference not just to SEIs but to Si-bases in general, i.e. SLIs too:

---

"and why they need ILEs to spell principles out for them." Your point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

But we can let you halfway off your petard because your original argument is anecdotal, so it's possible you've yet to encounter SEIs or Si-base types who can plunge in the abstraction pool without inflatable swimmy-wings.

---

Not many, but I did make a reference to the type of philosophizing I see Si doms go into, which is more or less what I think Ashton had in mind with his problems with SEIs. I was just stating my agreement.

But in your exacting principle-seeking, this is something you can take up with him and speak the Gamma-lingo, like I already suggested. Let me know what you find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

That's a poor dodge. ExI* isn't Si-base/-ego and you know that that isn't the point of dissent. Also, if you missed it in the catbox, mune says he'll probably add his two cents to this thread tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Your point?

---

---

The dispute is over whether SxI are capable of digesting and working with abstractions, not properties of ExIs as understood by this party or that. However you already know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Dude, show some dignity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Your point?

---

---

You're a nine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Puffery. You said quite clearly in reference not just to SEIs but to Si-bases in general, i.e. SLIs too:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Your point?

---

---

A very niney nine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Not many, but I did make a reference to the type of philosophizing I see Si doms go into, which is not exactly what I think Ashton had in mind with his problems with SEIs. I was just stating my agreement.

---

"Not many" as in none, per your original description. This implicit allusion you're claiming as a reference to types of abstraction looks like post hoc ass-covering. Either way, thanks for the Se-polr demo, Ne-EII/E9.

I think you're too absolutist/read into things only the way you want. You might take some lesson from Lenore Thomson et cetera on developing your second function more, I'll send you her book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

I think you're too absolutist/read into things only the way you want. You might take some lesson from Lenore Thomson et cetera on developing your second function more, I'll send you her book.

---

Stick with art, smoke-blower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Stick with art, smoke-blower.

---

You've yet to make a point this whole thread. So whether you restate the obvious or give some unproven fact, it's not helping the topic at hand. You can call it being Ni vs Se-PoLR all you want, it's irrelevant ;)

Step back and learn to comprehend what's being said by the other party before mentally masturbating on the issue. Also give some time for people to respond/word things out. I don't know what your schtick with exactness is, when I and most people on here are being general. It's an inactive social forum. Why I say this is, you seem to take things too literally and miss the point, can't tell if you're doing it on purpose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Step back and learn to comprehend what's being said by the other party before mentally masturbating on the issue.

---

Excuse me for having ruined your own wank by highlighting your chosen fantasy's flaws. While it's arguable whether you'd have remained contently oblivious to its errors without being elbowed, I do agree to your subsequent clarification, that Si-doms are likely to be receptive to and creative via certain fields and explanations of philosophy. However, see the concluding summary below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Also give some time for people to respond/word things out.

---

06:24 kassie, since you and poli are chums you shoudl explain to him why he ought to use the "preview post" feature instead of repeatedly revising his shit after publication.
06:24 and by should I mean, would you be so kind as to.
06:24 with a question mark
06:24 plz
06:25 he does himself no favors by giving daily tours of his sausage-making factory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

I don't know what your schtick with exactness is, when I and most people on here are being general.

---

It's useful when generalizing to announce it. Doing so prevents the watchful from raising the alarm when there's shit in the pudding. Btw, nice popular appeal in bold. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

You seem to take things too literally, can't tell if you're doing it on purpose either.

---

I used to wonder the same about the reason for the habitual abandonment of your own perspective in favor of Ashton's whenever he says "But..." Likewise your indignation when that strange capitulation is questioned. I'd held out hope that it was actually a sly prank you were pulling, but now I can see that it isn't. So, 9w1 sp/sx it is. But in response to your implicit question, logical inconsistencies and demonstrable falsehoods capture my attention automatically. Verbalizing corrections to them is volitional.

And on that note, my first objection was to your original blanket statement: SxIs as Si-doms are incapable of adroitly handling abstractions. It's since been shown that the absolutism of your binary argument leads to false conclusions, which, though you're presently too sour to admit it, you've already realized by altering your stance in a manner that accommodates greater reality and rationality. Good job. Feel free to lecture me on aesthetics in return when it suits your whimsy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

So far all you've done is be nitpicky and overly literal and I can see my own attempt at it has excited you. But no, you're still confused.

---

Then trim your shaggy logic down to an acceptable fuzziness and point out where I've gone wrong instead of making unsubstantiated assertions. But if that's too much effort just wait for Ashton to explain to you what I've said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHejCmbbXRc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Excuse me for having ruined your own wank by highlighting your chosen fantasy's flaws. While it's arguable whether you'd have remained contently oblivious to its errors without being elbowed, I do agree to your subsequent clarification, that Si-doms are likely to be receptive to and creative via certain fields and explanations of philosophy. However, see the concluding summary below.



It's useful when generalizing to announce it. Doing so prevents the watchful from raising the alarm when there's shit in the pudding. Btw, nice popular appeal in bold. :D



I used to wonder the same about the reason for the habitual abandonment of your own perspective in favor of Ashton's whenever he says "But..." Likewise your indignation when that strange capitulation is questioned. I'd held out hope that it was actually a sly prank you were pulling, but now I can see that it isn't. So, 9w1 sp/sx it is. But in response to your implicit question, logical inconsistencies and demonstrable falsehoods capture my attention automatically. Verbalizing corrections to them is volitional.

---

This here is your own game. Have no idea how you pull it out your ass and if it's directed towards me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

And on that note, my first objection was to your original blanket statement: SxIs as Si-doms are incapable of adroitly handling abstractions. It's since been shown that the absolutism of your binary argument leads to false conclusions, which, though you're presently too sour to admit it, you've already realized by altering your stance in a manner that accommodates greater reality and rationality. Good job. Feel free to lecture me on aesthetics in return when it suits your whimsy.

---

This here is your problem with direct comprehension. You're too hyper-literal, I never said anything 100% literal nor do I refer to every SEI I know. This is your invention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

06:24 kassie, since you and poli are chums you shoudl explain to him why he ought to use the "preview post" feature instead of repeatedly revising his shit after publication.
06:24 and by should I mean, would you be so kind as to.
06:24 with a question mark
06:24 plz
06:25 he does himself no favors by giving daily tours of his sausage-making factory.

---

:D. No this just shows how into it you really are. I still treat this place as a light discussion forum, not some talent show for poetry reading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ekpyrosos

Then trim your shaggy logic down to an acceptable fuzziness and point out where I've gone wrong instead of making unsubstantiated assertions. But if that's too much effort just wait for Ashton to explain to you what I've said.

---

You've said so much but so very little ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

This here is your own game. Have no idea how you pull it out your ass and if it's directed towards me.

---

This is an interesting projection considering that I just explained the exact opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

This here is your problem with direct comprehension. You're too hyper-literal, I never said anything 100% literal nor do I refer to every SEI I know. This is your invention.

---

Observe, via a few underlined additions, how clearly stating your original meaning (supposing this is what you actually meant at the time instead of pretending to later) would have prevented me from pointing out that your shoes are untied:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Oh true. Many SEIs I've known are like hmm and just ignore it, or else they don't know what to make of it like it's too abstract. I guess that's what being :Si: dominant can do to you and why they sometimes need ILEs to spell principles out for them. On the contrary most ESIs seem to go along with whatever it is and help generalize in their own way, that's part of their charm too.

---

Reading! Writing! How do they work?!?

Even if you go full van Gogh and impressionistically represent a scene with swirls and blobs it still looks like the horrifying potato field or stunning starry dome it was modeled upon. Likewise, despite the smudges and smears you've dabbed upon your original sketch, from beginning to end there's no mistaking that you're full of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

:D. No this just shows how into it you really are. I still treat this place as a light discussion forum, not some talent show for poetry reading.

---

What's showing is your love of contortionism in corners. Also:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Aw maritsa. You always have a way for words.

---

O:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

You've said so much but so very little ;)

---

In recognition of your inability to explain my error in any way but chanting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU", I hereby accept your passive-aggressive surrender. And as establishment of law is due the victor within the spoils of war, let the word go forth:

I got the last word, buttface.

ILI clusterfuckery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

On surface impressions, ESI and SEI can seem similar IME. Both tend to be approachable, somewhat warm, playful, etc. The term 'quasi-identical' can be taken literally in this respect.

Differences become markedly salient once psychological distance is tightened, however. Invariably, a lot of what I discuss tends to be more philosophical in nature—including observations of people, generalizations about life, history, etc. SEIs usually don't have a lot of patience for this sort of thing, at least coming from me. But ESIs will tend to find it interesting.

---

I can assure you that SEIs have a lot of patience listening to observations of people, generalizations about life, history etc., when it is provided by Ne-base types ;-) FWIW, I have noticed my GF is often very dismissive when she sees LIEs (and to a lesser extent ILIs) on TV. Sometimes she even asks me: "Now is that a Gamma?" :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

That's not an accurate characterization for a horizontal relationship - how do you think ESIs could get along with :Te: dominants by being "very exacting"?. If you have an ESI boss or neurotic mother, that might be true, even though they tendentially act in such a way when they are stressed and insecure as to what to do next.

---

In the exacting attitude, they help to ground their inventive, venturing duals and also participate in their business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Mune as in EII mune? I wasn't being overly absolute, I think well-balanced individuals of any type can be. Just I tend to see Ni-agendas taking this philosophical openness toward the unknown more than I do Ne-dual seekers, since Ne is often based on more objective conceptions, like SLI philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer is based around concrete qualia. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/au...hopenhauer.htm

---

Oh god. Look I know you see us as identical shadow clones or something, but my type really doesn't have anything to do with the particular claims you're making or all the backpedaling you've done in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

Except that he doesn't know much about how ExIs actually are? Maybe if we hold hands, go back to basics and read Jung. I have no problem with yours or his disagreement on the matter, just no info I take into consideration to my generalization on SEIs.

---

You do realize you sound like a tool when you insist on a generalization regardless of any information or arguments someone might make before you've even heard them.

The crux of what you're trying to say seems to be that having Ne as a suggestive function makes one capable of dealing in philosophy in a 'concrete' sense (not sure what you mean by that or what a few quotes by a guy is supposed to communicate) and sort of dismiss abstractions with a ho hum derpishness. On the other hand, Ne-PoLRs with Ni as hidden agenda renders one fully capable of abstract thinking. Or to put it in your words:

Quote:

---

Oh true. SEIs I've known are like hmm and just ignore it, or else they don't know what to make of it like it's too abstract. I guess that's what being

---

Quote:

---

:Si:dominant does to you and why they need ILEs to spell principles out for them. On the contrary ESIs seem to go along with whatever it is and help generalize in their own way, that's part of their charm too.

---

Abstract vs Concrete

So unless you've got some idiosyncratic definitions of these terms, should we expect Si-doms incapable of categorizations, logical relationships, concepts such as mathematics, truth, justice, physical principles governing phenomena? Whereas abstractions such as these are accepted easily without objection by xSIs?

I'll save my personal account of why I enjoyed philosophy, what I got from it, how I use it and how I can't very well, as you won't give a shit since we're mind twins and I know neither what it means to be ESI, EII nor obviously SEI. Furthermore, I'd also like to note objections over how useful a generalization you're even holding, since you maintain that it is counterevidenced by well-balanced individuals, among other things. Though who knows, maybe you also hold that most people are pretty fucked up.

Terminological notes

Suggestive Function

The suggestive function is also called the dual-seeking function. The subject finds it difficult to be overwhelmed by this element, since it perfectly complements and drives the activity of the leading function. The more it is present in his daily life, the more he will naturally adapt to its presence (see dualization). They are easily entertained by this kind of information, and its sustained presence creates a soothing psychological effect. If someone experiences a deficiency of it in his environment, he may attempt to supply it himself, but become soon exhausted. Unlike the mobilizing function, concentrated and prolonged doses from other people are received positively (depending somewhat on the individual's degree of dualization).
People focus deeply on the use of this function in day-to-day life, always attempting to digest information received from the environment through this aspect of reality. This is because it complements the leading function, making an individual not only more understanding but more satisfied about their pursuits in the Ego.

Hidden Agenda

The mobilizing function is also called the activating function and the hidden agenda function. Help in this element is appreciated, but past a certain point is seen as excessive. The subject is more comfortable using this function than the suggestive function but still can only use it sporadically. If he isn't careful and directs it at an individual who does not value it, he will likely meet a harsh response, since they are almost sure to see it as a puerile gesture (more so than when he uses the suggestive function, usage of which comes off as more mature and well-considered, since he takes it more seriously in the first place). The subject's innate lack of balance in the mobilizing function can easily cause him to indulge in it recklessly or to sorely neglect it. It is best used in support of the suggestive function.
If too much of this element is ambient, the person will get bored or even become repelled. He sees it as a necessary part of good living, but not a primary life goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa33

In the exacting attitude, they help to ground their inventive, venturing duals and also participate in their business.

---

That's not what most people think when they see "exacting attitude".

I think you're missing the context of what Ashton was talking about partly therein taking the generalization too far like sir corpse did. The idea that Si-PoLRs ultimately find fault with Si due to its specific more down-to-earth nature in cognition isn't a bad claim. I can post quotes by these LIE, ESI, ILE and SEI philosophers and it might shed a bit of light on which from experience most SEIs often lack and Ne dominants seem to provide this more objectivizing basis that they show interest in and wrap their mind around, which is probably a large reason for why many non-philosopher Si doms I know officially study it in terms of Ne being processed and "read", it's a bit different from fully gratifying Ne themselves. I know some SEIs who type INTJ in MBTI, they're interested like anyone else in philosophical quotes and general phrasings and principles about life, yet wouldn't be one to openly meander and enlighten themselves with that heavyness I see in ESIs and Ni-agendea, it's really an opposite feel to one another because ESIs have no objectivizing basis (Ne) nor one to dual-seek, they seem to be engrained into it as a strictly personalized process away from labels and the like. Hopefully I've worded this with simply enough posturing of 'appropriateness' to be considered to hold any merit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by munenori2

Suggestive Function

[/COLOR]The suggestive function is also called the dual-seeking function. The subject finds it difficult to be overwhelmed by this element, since it perfectly complements and drives the activity of the leading function. The more it is present in his daily life, the more he will naturally adapt to its presence (see dualization). They are easily entertained by this kind of information, and its sustained presence creates a soothing psychological effect. If someone experiences a deficiency of it in his environment, he may attempt to supply it himself, but become soon exhausted. Unlike the mobilizing function, concentrated and prolonged doses from other people are received positively (depending somewhat on the individual's degree of dualization).
People focus deeply on the use of this function in day-to-day life, always attempting to digest information received from the environment through this aspect of reality. This is because it complements the leading function, making an individual not only more understanding but more satisfied about their pursuits in the Ego.

Hidden Agenda

The mobilizing function is also called the activating function and the hidden agenda function. Help in this element is appreciated, but past a certain point is seen as excessive. The subject is more comfortable using this function than the suggestive function but still can only use it sporadically. If he isn't careful and directs it at an individual who does not value it, he will likely meet a harsh response, since they are almost sure to see it as a puerile gesture (more so than when he uses the suggestive function, usage of which comes off as more mature and well-considered, since he takes it more seriously in the first place). The subject's innate lack of balance in the mobilizing function can easily cause him to indulge in it recklessly or to sorely neglect it. It is best used in support of the suggestive function.
If too much of this element is ambient, the person will get bored or even become repelled. He sees it as a necessary part of good living, but not a primary life goal.

---

This is more or less true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by munenori2

since we're mind twins

---

:ew:

I feel like if I drilled a hole in my forehead suddenly I would understand everything you've said and how far back you've tracked.

In my experience: In a nutshell: SEI's can be rather random and tend to always be thinking of others comfort and are less judgmental [at least out loud]. On the other hand, ESI's are stricter and much more likely to be judgmental and may not let something go if they were hurt "too much" by you.

Some other differences I have noticed are: an SEI will go shopping with you and randomly go "oh X would really like that." While ESI's if they're shopping for someone else will have a tendency of already thinking about it before they go shopping. SEI's also may try to pay for dinner if they sense that you're having a bad week/day, while ESI's tend to think that you should just learn to deal with the pain, however on occasion they may take you out to "celebrate" something, but I've never had one pay for a meal when I was feeling down. SEI's will be much more open to hearing how your day went [even if it was a negative day.] While ESI's will generally cut you off as soon as you start getting negative, some are much more tactful at this then others. SEI's tend to not be very scheduled, although they may stick to a to-do list every now and then. ESI's tend to be very organized and scheduled, and often expect others to be just as much as they are and they will get stressed out if you aren't. When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them. [This is a weird one, and I'm not sure if it's true, but:] SEI's tend to get along with all ages, especially those young at heart, while ESI's generally like only those their age or over, they tend to go for more "mature" people. One that I knew only had my brother, I and another friend that were her age at the wedding, and everyone else seemed to be fourty and above. It was really odd. . .

Hopefully this helps.

Also, the difference between duality and conflict is with conflicters you tend to always be stressed out and in the end you're wondering how you can change yourself to make yourself more agreeable to them. While with duals you tend to just go with the flow and be yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold

Who is? ;)

---

Try to guess.

I think SEIs are my duals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

I can assure you that SEIs have a lot of patience listening to observations of people, generalizations about life, history etc., when it is provided by Ne-base types ;-)

---

Yeah, hence the operative phrase "at least coming from me." TeNi does it differently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I think SEIs are my duals.

---

Must be mine too. ESIs sound horrid from yellow82's description.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

Must be mine too. ESIs sound horrid from yellow82's description.

---

of course they would

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

of course they would

---

Or yellow82 has typed people wrong. Or she's typing unhealthy people with neurotic attributes. Or it's just how ESIs subjectively come across in her perspective. Or some combination thereof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashton

Or yellow82 has typed people wrong. Or she's typing unhealthy people with neurotic attributes. Or it's just how ESIs subjectively come across in her perspective. Or some combination thereof.

---

I disagree, I think Yellow painted a fairly accurate observation of SEI vs ESI with a few generalizations (such as ESI's only wanting to be with people their own age, which isn't really applicable to type).
I for one did not find her remarks about either types as painting unhealthy or unlikeable people, but I can understand why neither you or FDG would particularity like the characteristics of an Fi base rational introvert in the same way that I often cringe at Se dominant descriptions...because I don't value it, not because Se base observations portray a negative individual

i don't see why it would be strange that an ESE's description of an ESI wouldn't sound great to an LIE. they would have different impressions and notice different things about the same person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow82

In my experience: In a nutshell: SEI's can be rather random and tend to always be thinking of others comfort and are less judgmental [at least out loud]. On the other hand, ESI's are stricter and much more likely to be judgmental and may not let something go if they were hurt "too much" by you.

Some other differences I have noticed are: an SEI will go shopping with you and randomly go "oh X would really like that." While ESI's if they're shopping for someone else will have a tendency of already thinking about it before they go shopping. SEI's also may try to pay for dinner if they sense that you're having a bad week/day, while ESI's tend to think that you should just learn to deal with the pain, however on occasion they may take you out to "celebrate" something, but I've never had one pay for a meal when I was feeling down. SEI's will be much more open to hearing how your day went [even if it was a negative day.] While ESI's will generally cut you off as soon as you start getting negative, some are much more tactful at this then others. SEI's tend to not be very scheduled, although they may stick to a to-do list every now and then. ESI's tend to be very organized and scheduled, and often expect others to be just as much as they are and they will get stressed out if you aren't. When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them. [This is a weird one, and I'm not sure if it's true, but:] SEI's tend to get along with all ages, especially those young at heart, while ESI's generally like only those their age or over, they tend to go for more "mature" people. One that I knew only had my brother, I and another friend that were her age at the wedding, and everyone else seemed to be fourty and above. It was really odd. . .

Hopefully this helps.

Also, the difference between duality and conflict is with conflicters you tend to always be stressed out and in the end you're wondering how you can change yourself to make yourself more agreeable to them. While with duals you tend to just go with the flow and be yourself.

---

:doh:

I think you missed the entire meaning of :Fi: and replaced it with strict hermit. Here's a good sign of someone mistyping people.

Honestly, I didn't mean to be negative. Two of my best friends and my grandmother are ESI.

They're all like that. Strict. That's why they're so good for ENTj's. :P

My grandmother and grandfather are ISFj-ENTj, and they're a lovely couple. They're very strict though and when I'm there I have to have a schedule and stay on it or it is extremely stressful for them. My mother [INTp] is the same way except to a slightly less degree.

I don't see being strict, judgmental or scheduled as particularly bad traits, in fact, they can be very good traits as my grandparents are very responsible and are millionaires probably greatly due to the way that they live; extremely organized, well thought out and scheduled.

And what I meant by the way the ISFj's tend to avoid negative topics is that if we get into a conversation that is slightly bearing towards negative, the ISFj will tend to sit down and have the mentality that I need to organize my negative thoughts and address them in a civilized manner or not address it at all. They also tend to plan their "sit-downs". It's kind of like, "oh, you want to tell me something about how you're feeling? Ok. How does seven work for you?"

Again, being organized and scheduled is not a negative trait. It's a trait that I actually greatly admire and yet do not have. :P

And also, I said that the whole age thing might not actually be a characteristic of the ISFj, I was just throwing that out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

i don't see why it would be strange that an ESE's description of an ESI wouldn't sound great to an LIE. they would have different impressions and notice different things about the same person.

---

Her descriptions are not really that subjective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kassie

i don't see why it would be strange that an ESE's description of an ESI wouldn't sound great to an LIE. they would have different impressions and notice different things about the same person.

---

I don't think Yellows type has anything to do with her observation, even if she has a preference for FeSi, her understanding of FiSe was still fairly consistent. But than again, I didn't find anything negative about her understanding of ESI's and can see how her observations of their directness and lack of spontaneity is something that an LIE would in fact find positive, whereas an SLE (which I strongly believe Ashton is) would find such an individual unappealing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold

Her descriptions are not really that subjective.

---

this is partly true, my attention went more to things like "scheduled" and "polite" and i automatically threw out things like "may also pay for dinner" and "to-do lists" as i was reading because they are ridiculously specific.

i don't think this disproves my point though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I don't think Yellows type has anything to do with her observation, even if she has a preference for FeSi, her understanding of FiSe was still fairly consistent. But than again, I didn't find anything negative about her understanding of ESI's and can see how her observations of their directness and lack of spontaneity is something that an LIE would in fact find positive, whereas an SLE (which I strongly believe Ashton is) would find such an individual unappealing

---

fairly consistent with what?

Quote:

---

this is partly true, my attention went more to things like "scheduled" and "polite" and i automatically threw out things like "may also pay for dinner" and "to-do lists" as i was reading because they are ridiculously specific.

i don't think this disproves my point though.

---

I was merely giving my life experience with the types, non-specific and specific details. If the OP had wanted the basic description of each type it is easy to find on the internet and he wouldn't have come here. . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow82

I was merely giving my life experience with the types, non-specific and specific details. If the OP had wanted the basic description of each type it is easy to find on the internet and he wouldn't have come here. . .

---

i don't see anything wrong with sharing your experiences of actual people that you've typed. i find it preferable to talking about people as abstractions for sure. i don't personally find descriptions of behaviors that painstakingly specific very helpful but i wasn't intending to target you, sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

of course they would

---

Too bad I've been in a relationship with an ESI for 5 years...as usual, you have "strong belief" about concepts and occurrences which conflict with reality.

the only observation which I found true is:

Quote:

---

When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them.

---

which is a kind of obvious difference between IJ-negativist-result-serious and IP-negativist-process-merry. It's much more pronounced for male ESIs (they tend to be more reserved than female ESIs).

Quote:

---

Honestly, I didn't mean to be negative. Two of my best friends and my grandmother are ESI.

They're all like that. Strict. That's why they're so good for ENTj's.

My grandmother and grandfather are ISFj-ENTj, and they're a lovely couple. They're very strict though and when I'm there I have to have a schedule and stay on it or it is extremely stressful for them. My mother [INTp] is the same way except to a slightly less degree.

I don't see being strict, judgmental or scheduled as particularly bad traits, in fact, they can be very good traits as my grandparents are very responsible and are millionaires probably greatly due to the way that they live; extremely organized, well thought out and scheduled.

And what I meant by the way the ISFj's tend to avoid negative topics is that if we get into a conversation that is slightly bearing towards negative, the ISFj will tend to sit down and have the mentality that I need to organize my negative thoughts and address them in a civilized manner or not address it at all. They also tend to plan their "sit-downs". It's kind of like, "oh, you want to tell me something about how you're feeling? Ok. How does seven work for you?"

Again, being organized and scheduled is not a negative trait. It's a trait that I actually greatly admire and yet do not have.

And also, I said that the whole age thing might not actually be a characteristic of the ISFj, I was just throwing that out there.

---

Do you really believe that the way of living of your grandparents can be extended to ESIs (or LIEs) who are in their 20s, 30s or even 40s? Old people tend to be scheduled, strict and boring compared to youngsters, ceteris paribus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I disagree, I think Yellow painted a fairly accurate observation of SEI vs ESI with a few generalizations (such as ESI's only wanting to be with people their own age, which isn't really applicable to type).
I for one did not find her remarks about either types as painting unhealthy or unlikeable people, but I can understand why neither you or FDG would particularity like the characteristics of an Fi base rational introvert in the same way that I often cringe at Se dominant descriptions...because I don't value it, not because Se base observations portray a negative individual

---

You're like a bose-einstein condensate of stupidity, bigotry and preconception.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ESI Female portrait, Beskova

DREISERKAs are demanding of themselves, they possess strong wills and they can force themselves to take to heart the fact that making children usually is not desirable (this was the only interpretation that I could make of this). But they also manifest an exactingness of others. Such that, not all of those desiring can become girl friends and friends of this girl. DREISERKA is very, very exacting of others. And no one gets away with any irresponsibility. Homework she does in accordance with a plan same as, however, many other things. She loves the measured-out life from childhood itself and she can get upset, if her plans are destroyed. In such cases, unexpectedly, even a scene with tears can occur. Thus, there must be no unexpected trips to the zoo or the aquarium (the original Russian word described a place for just dolphins and other marine mammals, not that it has any relevance to the text). It is better to plan matters beforehand.

---

I think generally most people have met a ESI like this, not to say all of them are like this, but just it's kinda of memorable.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=ESI_male_and_female

http://www.hulu.com/watch/314500/cel...dcarnie-wilson

This is a example of imo a RL ESI, Tracey Gold.

I'm sure there's plenty of unmemorable ESI's who do whatever but it's not unusual to meet someone like this and typically people remember such a person due to these novel and consistent characteristics which they display that others might not. This particular episode if wife swap has a dual rational couple swap with a non-dual irrational couple. A good example of contrasting lifestyles, although at the extremes.

Well doing homework according to a plan and starting to cry if such a plan isn't carried out doesn't really seem that exacting, more like a bit cute. Exacting has to do with forcing other people to do stuff, usually...

I have to say I think ESI's are considered exacting by many, there is this XSXp girl that I work with that would cry every day because of her ESI supervisor, they get along now but when she first began she had so many demands from the ESI that she would crumble in tears.

Also for example, on the show Top Chef, this season there is imo a ESI chef who is very exacting.

http://www.bravotv.com/top-chef/season-9/bio/lindsay-autry

On one of the challenges, she was very detailed in how she wanted her fish cooked and because of her unwavering need to have it cooked in a certain way, she was unable to work with the person who cooked her dish. This is someone that for sure could have cooked that fish to perfection, but was basically micro-managed. Also due to the stress of the challenge she blew up but she probably is generally a very polite person.

I believe this is a fairly cold version of the ESI type and she could also be LSI, but I think generally when people think of ESI, her and Tracey Gold are decent representative.

I don't really view exacting and scheduled as bad traits, I view myself am as an exacting person. But certainly there are differences in how I express this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Well doing homework according to a plan and starting to cry if such a plan isn't carried out doesn't really seem that exacting, more like a bit cute. Exacting has to do with forcing other people to do stuff, usually...

---

Oh God, my h-homework!! :lol:

I don't care about organizing other peoples lives but I have to know what is going to happen in mine and that affects the people I'm close to. one of the issues between me and my ex was he would do this thing of "I got a plan, its covered, don't worry," but he wouldn't explain anything. sometimes I would ignore it and do my own thing to take care of the situation because I couldn't stand just stepping back and not knowing what was going to happen. and then our different courses of action would conflict and fuck everything up. either that or I would be completely stressed out not knowing. he took it as a sign that I didn't trust him. but I can't stand looking forward and just seeing a tangle and not untangling it as soon as possible. so I wouldn't say exacting in terms of being bossy but exacting over my own situation and I need other people to be on board with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow82

In my experience: In a nutshell: SEI's can be rather random and tend to always be thinking of others comfort and are less judgmental [at least out loud]. On the other hand, ESI's are stricter and much more likely to be judgmental and may not let something go if they were hurt "too much" by you.

Some other differences I have noticed are: an SEI will go shopping with you and randomly go "oh X would really like that." While ESI's if they're shopping for someone else will have a tendency of already thinking about it before they go shopping. SEI's also may try to pay for dinner if they sense that you're having a bad week/day, while ESI's tend to think that you should just learn to deal with the pain, however on occasion they may take you out to "celebrate" something, but I've never had one pay for a meal when I was feeling down. SEI's will be much more open to hearing how your day went [even if it was a negative day.] While ESI's will generally cut you off as soon as you start getting negative, some are much more tactful at this then others. SEI's tend to not be very scheduled, although they may stick to a to-do list every now and then. ESI's tend to be very organized and scheduled, and often expect others to be just as much as they are and they will get stressed out if you aren't. When an SEI goes to an event they will tend to seek out other people to talk to, while an ESI will often be very awkward and hope and pray that someone will approach them, and if someone does they will in a very polite manner talk to them. [This is a weird one, and I'm not sure if it's true, but:] SEI's tend to get along with all ages, especially those young at heart, while ESI's generally like only those their age or over, they tend to go for more "mature" people. One that I knew only had my brother, I and another friend that were her age at the wedding, and everyone else seemed to be fourty and above. It was really odd. . .

Hopefully this helps.

Also, the difference between duality and conflict is with conflicters you tend to always be stressed out and in the end you're wondering how you can change yourself to make yourself more agreeable to them. While with duals you tend to just go with the flow and be yourself.

---

At large these are good observations, but I don't agree that SEIs tend to be always thinking about other people's comfort. They are not, they are much more focused on their own comfort, but they'll allow others to hop on the bandwagon and they can even be pleased if someone expresses appreciation for this comfort. Thinking about other people's comfort is more of an ESE thing. (also, when other people benefit from their Si, SEIs will feel appreciated for who they are, ESEs will feel appreciated for what they do)

The thing about ESIs making themselves very hard to approach is very true. It can be even worse: when they are approached, they might react in such a way that it results into rejection of the attempt. My gut feeling is that ESIs apply high standards (even those that have nothing to offer themselves), and you really need to persist in the effort to get anywhere.

well, for a starter; a random SEI is more likely to be overweight than its ESI counterpart.
So, next time you see a random overweight, not yet typed, person, do remember that it's likelier that the person is SEI>ESI.

Also, in comparison to SEIs, ESIs have their muscles tense.


Also, in comparison to ESIs, SEIs don't really like taking sides. Remember: SEI the Mediator. ESI the Guardian.
---

One could even go and construct a stereotype, like this:
SEI => Overweight, relaxed person that never takes sides.
ESI => Underweight, tense person that always takes sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trevor

well, for a starter; a random SEI is more likely to be overweight than its ESI counterpart.
So, next time you see a random overweight, not yet typed, person, do remember that it's likelier that the person is SEI>ESI.

Also, in comparison to SEIs, ESIs have their muscles tense.


Also, in comparison to ESIs, SEIs don't really like taking sides. Remember: SEI the Mediator. ESI the Guardian.
---

One could even go and construct a stereotype, like this:
SEI => Overweight, relaxed person that never takes sides.
ESI => Underweight, tense person that always takes sides.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0_SaJT-80Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_Glcf_D5J4