Define Se and how it looks like in Egoblock

I have an ESI mother... and an ILI father.

My observations of my mother lead me to conclude that I do not have Se in egoblock.

When her Se seems activated - and it´s not like just once in a while, it´s very easy for her to activate it - she starts being domineering. In a physical manner even, like taking things from my hand as if I were a two year old and not way stronger than her...but anyway I would never beat her so I let her do it.

Another thing I realised reading posts on this thread is that Se has to do with MOVING CONCRETE MATERIAL OBJECTS IN SPACE. People with Se in egoblock seem to like to move things materially. My mother, if I´d let her, just comes here and takes everything out of place. This pisses me off beyond description, as I hate when someone takes an object which belongs to me and moves it, I am obsessed with order and do not like one grain of salt of mine being moved from place because I feel like I´m going to loose that object, and I frequently do if I do not keep the objects 'in their places'. If things get messed up in my room I´m likely to loose half of them and break the other half because of my rage for having lost the former.

I definitely do not like to move a lot. I think Se people tend to be more active than Si people, I mean ppl with either of these IEs on their egoblock. Se people tend to LIKE to move more, even though they end up moving less, as in the case of an ESTP compared to some very active ESTJ. But the ESTJ is definitely more strained by physical excesses than the ESTP, and this applies to Delta STs in general. I think that Si gives an ability to sense comfortable as well as uncomfortable states of mind and body. A practical example, which I think is Si, I´d like opinions:

I´m studying Law and some of the subjects I´m studying are in classes where the seats are not very comfortable, they have no cushion, no pad, nothing, just flat hard wood. I call them 'catholic seats' as a joke, because they remind me of those terribly uncomfortable catholic seats I used to sit in every sunday when I was a kid, also made of hard wood without any type of cushion. They´d just make me angry at the whole catholic stuff and make me want to leave ASAP.

Then these seats in my University which are not comfortable, they ruin the classes. I get angry. Because they mainly hurt my butt and my column, I can´t understand how other people seem to stand them well. Only very fat people should stand those seats well, as they have a natural cushion, then it´s understandable.

To me this indicates strong Si in myself...and somewhat constant also. Because it happens everyday. I picked my subjects this semester not by the ones I enjoyed the most, but by the ones I saw were to be had in the rooms with cushioned seats. This is almost madness but it has to be otherwise I get too angry and don´t go to the classes.

Anyway I ended up with 2 subjects which I couldn´t escape...and it sucks to be sitting for 2 hours on those terrible seats. To me this indicates Si, is it or not?

no, that's just being a priss.

boy your latest post there reminds me of my uncle who is definitely ESTj. :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strrrng

no, that's just being a priss.

---

:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redbaron

boy your latest post there reminds me of my uncle who is definitely ESTj. :thumbsup:

---

in which aspect, feeling uncomfortable physically or getting angry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

in which aspect, feeling uncomfortable physically or getting angry?

---

Don't ask Te PoLRs clarifying questions.

lol thanks for the reminder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

There would be a limit, say 50 million dollars, for your money including your belongings, cars, jets, etc. No one needs a fucking private jet! The money would be distributed more evenly, and not GIVEN TO PEOPLE, but instead, GIVEN TO STRONG GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTIONS which would ensure that nobody needed much money to live - those who wanted to try to make the 50 million dollar limit, would be free to pursue their greedy goal, but people with time would begin to make fun of these people and find them somewhat perverted and wicked because spirituality would be fostered and people would have more internal values, and see that life is short, we have to live the moment, and we have to enjoy our lives, not waste it working like an unconscious robot without any passion. If your work makes you feel good, then perfect, you´re on the right track. But there should be no people working just to pay their bills. I´d rather put a .45 caliber bullet in my fucking mouth than live a life like this, or shoot as many people as I could before shooting myself, because they´re supporting this system and not revolting.

---

This is absurd. No person has the right to determine how another person lives their life – period. And how contradictory, that you actually delegate such a responsibility to a "strong governmental institution," as if casting a black cloud over things is the way to prevent energy waste. You're naive if you think such a group wouldn't end up using the liberal pretense that gave them power toward their own "greedy" ends. Also, there is a difference between working as an automaton for da system and using a capitalistic market to pursue material gain in the way you find most personally fulfilling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

I think words like force, strength, willpower, motivation, volition, mobilization, etc. are associated with Se because these words are trying to get at the concept of what Se is not because there's some claim that Se is these words. This concept once seen, can be seen in people, whether Se leading or creative (or really in any place in the Socionics "psyche" in its corresponding form). For instance I do see ESIs as "forceful." They're not "forceful" in that Se way that Se leading is, but I can see the use of their creative function when it's "on." It just isn't on constantly in the way it is with Se leading. And by all of this I don't mean that Se leading is constantly knocking people around and bellowing out commands to mobilize people and beating their chests or whatever as that is absurd. And Se leading can even be quiet and shy. It isn't about that, it's about seeing the Se and I can see why "forceful" is one of the words used to try to get at it.

I also think that it tends to be convenient to fall back on words like "forceful" or whatever as a sort of shorthand of trying to get at the concept behind the words, a concept which isn't so easily stated in words without going on for paragraphs about it (and when people do that, there's still a lot of disagreement and I don't see how it can ever be chiseled down into something so precise that everyone agrees so I see it as futile to bother... although not that I think it's useless to write out long paragraphs for further understanding). But falling back on such words doesn't necessarily mean one doesn't understand the concept itself or something close to it (or hasn't examined thoughtfully in their own mind what they think the concept is/means). Anyway I tend to see the words as secondary to the concepts because it's not like in Socionics things are the easiest to describe in the first place because these concepts are pretty abstract. Of course, I kind of suspect some of these arguments come up because people detect that the concept in someone else's mind doesn't match the one in their own mind precisely enough.

I also think that everything can be misleading and that one has to at some point just trust others to use their brains... Although I can see that if something seems to be misleading everyone most of the time it needs to perhaps be changed into something that will mislead a smaller percentage of people... but I don't really think the buzz words for Se (like "forceful") are that problematic. Seeing the string of Se buzz words together actually does rather get at the concept of what Se is especially when looked at in comparison with the buzz words for Ne, Si, etc. and then when considered with other Socionics source material and so on. It's basically that people have to draw their own conclusions and hopefully for the sake of communication "we" can all try to get close enough to be able to actually communicate and get somewhere in discussion but I don't really have a lot of faith in that, but somehow still remain optimistic at the same time (in that it is possible).

---

I like this :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

I definitely do not like to move a lot. I think Se people tend to be more active than Si people, I mean ppl with either of these IEs on their egoblock. Se people tend to LIKE to move more, even though they end up moving less, as in the case of an ESTP compared to some very active ESTJ. But the ESTJ is definitely more strained by physical excesses than the ESTP, and this applies to Delta STs in general. I think that Si gives an ability to sense comfortable as well as uncomfortable states of mind and body. A practical example, which I think is Si, I´d like opinions:

---

It depends more so on type and their temperament IMO than directly to valued IE's.
ESE and LSE are generally the most consistently mobile types and this is even more noticeable when in comparison to, in this context, an ESI or LSI. In the case of Se dominants, their mobility is inconsistent, succumbing to sporadic rushes and than tapering down.
Se creatives, with their Si Demonstrative, can easily fall into periods of self-indulgence and laziness, more so than Si creatives typically would

So suggesting Se egos like to "move" is not generally the case, especially when comparing them to Ni PoLR's who are the least naturally stagnant types

Amazon.com: Basic Economics 3rd Ed: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy (9780465002603): Thomas Sowell: Books

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I like this :thumbsup:



It depends more so on type and their temperament IMO than directly to valued IE's.
ESE and LSE are generally the most consistently mobile types and this is even more noticeable when in comparison to, in this context, an ESI or LSI. In the case of Se dominants, their mobility is inconsistent, succumbing to sporadic rushes and than tapering down.
Se creatives, with their Si Demonstrative, can easily fall into periods of self-indulgence and laziness, more so than Si creatives typically would

So suggesting Se egos like to "move" is not generally the case, especially when comparing them to Ni PoLR's who are the least naturally stagnant types

---

Se egoes like to move things, physical objects, to take them and move them.

In terms of moving objects and applying force to affect their surroundings, Se/Ti egoes do this a lot more than Te/Si leadings. Beta STs move things more than Delta STs.

They are also more ready for immediate action than an ESTJ or an ISTP.

If you still have your own peculiar understanding of Socionica, then here it is from wikisocion what you should learn.

this is Se described in the SLE:

"SLEs are strong-willed, independently-minded individuals who are able to recognize levels of willpower and motivation in others. They are almost always collected and ready for action. They are adept at organizing others effectively towards any given objective, and have no problem "getting the job done," even if it requires stepping on a few toes. They will take the initiative and act at the opportune moment. SLEs will often act without complete information, improvising as they go, but are successful nonetheless. Instability energizes them, as they are active people who think clearly on the move and tend to be unsatisfied with a stationary, peaceful lifestyle.

SLEs easily spot power dynamics within any given structure, hierarchy or relationship, and strive for a secure position where they are less subordinate to others. At the same time, SLEs are comfortable with hierarchies, and recognize that they are a necessary part of everyday life. SLEs may sometimes seem dismissive of those of a lower social status, as if they were weak or inferior in some way. Likewise, they see dependence as weakness, and so strive to minimize their dependence on others, especially in their personal relationships.

SLEs' energetic and direct nature tends to make them natural leaders. They are quick to assume this role, even in alien or unfamiliar environments. They usually adopt a direct administrative style and build a bureaucratic structure beneath them over time. They will take full responsibility for their actions, and understand these terms when they take a leadership-based role within a group, company or organization as being part of what leadership is about.

SLEs are highly observant and take note of all the objects present in their surroundings. They are well aware of which objects they have, and which they want, and tend to be possessive of their property. At the same time, they also have a generous streak and can easily bestow gifts and share their property with others to demonstrate acceptance of the other person or people."

Now again, Se as described in the LSI:

"LSIs prefer to apply their clear, logical thinking to forcibly affect how the real world is organized, rather than simply producing conjectures or thought exercises that have no material application. LSIs prefer to work with systems of "real" things — material assets, organizations, management, and production — and to perfect their structure and organization (Ti). When they are certain they are right, LSIs can act decisively to enforce rules, and, if necessary, to punish violators, in order to protect the integrity of the system.

LSIs handle high-pressure situations well and can maneuver skillfully around obstacles to achieve their goals. They cannot be intimidated easily by displays of force or aggression, but follow closely the balance of power and make sure they are in the best position."

What is in bold is what you should learn about Socionica instead of talking your own theories which clearly come from other universes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

It depends more so on type and their temperament IMO than directly to valued IE's.
ESE and LSE are generally the most consistently mobile types and this is even more noticeable when in comparison to, in this context, an ESI or LSI. In the case of Se dominants, their mobility is inconsistent, succumbing to sporadic rushes and than tapering down.
Se creatives, with their Si Demonstrative, can easily fall into periods of self-indulgence and laziness, more so than Si creatives typically would

So suggesting Se egos like to "move" is not generally the case, especially when comparing them to Ni PoLR's who are the least naturally stagnant types

---

You also get lazy immobile XSEs so I don't know how consistent and general your 'consistently' and 'generally' can be.

now lets take a look at Se in the LSE:

" LSEs prefer to maintain a steady rhythm and energy output, avoiding projects that require a great deal of energy for a short period of time, or courses of action that are clearly ridden with obstacles.

They try not to be too forceful, controlling, or demanding and try to avoid coming across this way. They may, however, show brief flashes of protectiveness and confrontation if they have been attacked in any way.

LSEs have a clear awareness of how they look to those around them. They craft their appearance and their belongings to create an impression that is welcoming and approachable rather than eye-catching or status-oriented. "

For a guy who came from an enneagram environment you sure know your way around plus that guy you spoke of in the past, the guy with ******, swastikas avatars - you're the same guy with a new account ? Heh. The guy even speaks the way you do. Same choice of quoted material in signature(s).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absurd

For a guy who came from an enneagram environment you sure know your way around plus that guy you spoke of in the past, the guy with ******, swastikas avatars - you're the same guy with a new account ? Heh. The guy even speaks the way you do. Same choice of quoted material in signature(s).

---

I know my way around because I study Socionica every fucking day at least one hour per day since I got to know it.

I´m not that guy, I´m another guy, but I am a friend of the guy you mention, Sharrum, it was him who introduced me to Socionica, we met in an Enneagram forum and we live in the same country but different cities (I live in Rio de Janeiro he lives in Belo Horizonte) which are roughly 500km apart from each other, but not very far, speaking in terms of how far cities are in Brazil.

I liked his ****** quote, so I copied it. He never cited the Buddha, though.

I am also writing the first Brazilian Portuguese handbook on Socionica... I´ve already started. It´s just meant to be a general very basic introduction to the system in Portuguese, because there is almost no Socionica literature available in our language.

In fact I´ve been doing research on the biggest bookstores and found only one small booklet in Portuguese about Socionica, which was though, written in Portugal Portuguese, which has a somewhat different vocabulary and style of writing than Brazilian Portuguese.

And since I began my humble effort to make a handbook of Socionica to Brazilian Portuguese speakers, I noticed that the original name of the system is Socionika, and it would translate best to my language as Sociônica, as we have the -ônica suffix to denote a system, a group or a characteristic. I think this suffix is very common in most western languages, such as Histrionic, Anedonic, Philarmonic, etc, which in Portuguese are Histriônico(a), Anedônico(a), Filarmônica.

So I think the translation to English should also be Socionica, this is why I will refer from now on to this system as Socionica.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Words

You also get lazy immobile XSEs so I don't know how consistent and general your 'consistently' and 'generally' can be.

---

Where did you get that from, I never heard anyone saying that an LSE could be lazy like I am... I mean not VERY lazy, I do what I like with a lot of efficiency and passion. But things I don´t like, or I think are boring, I just completely have no will to do, and have to push myself to do them, such as studying subjects I don´t enjoy, etc.

Nevertheless when I enjoy a subject, I am a very fast learner and also a very obstinate student of it. I learned English and French very quick, also Spanish, and I plan to learn German enough to understand a TV News of a German Channel, but I´ve already learned basic German also. And Enneagram also, and now Socionics, these things I´m passionate about, I do put my energy in. But what I´m not passionate about, like Law for example, it´s just a heavy burden for me to have to learn it.

Here's an Se ego, Ne polr anecdote.

My EXE best friend is dating an Se-LSI. This LSI wants to go into law school but he's seriously struggling to get the top grades he needs on his LSATs. He's a very argumentative sort, constructing excellent arguments that are firm in their position and demonstrate his clear outlook on a situation. He uses evidence to make a very concrete case for whatever position he takes (and is willing to argue more than one side if necessary).

However, he struggles at shutting down all the loopholes. When he reads a paragraph of information he's very good at picking out what is relevant, what is there, and what can be used to build his case. His difficulty comes at seeing what isn't there, what could be the case, and the innumerable ways to manipulate the evidence to come out with a different conclusion.

He wants to pursue contract law and comes from the perspective of making the rules or making the boundaries. He's good at observing the rules. He's good at constructing those rules. He's good at working with the rules. He's not as good at thinking of all the ways those rules can be broken or manipulated on a technicality.

Removed at User Request

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by discojoe

Amazon.com: Basic Economics 3rd Ed: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy (9780465002603): Thomas Sowell: Books

---

thanks for the recommendation, but I don´t like Economics. It´s mostly crap which has lead the world to these crisis. So I dream of a day where all these books about Economy will be burned and a new system implemented, less capitalist, and more socialist, although leaning more towards capitalism, as was Fascism for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pied Piper

I think Socionics is the correct naming in English. For example, it is called socionică in Romanian, the same way bionics is called bionică.

Probably "bionika" in Russian.

---

You know Romanian shares some common features with Romance languages, so you probably understand that there are very similar terms, so at least in Portuguese, the best translation is Sociônica or Socionica (there was a recent reform which confused Portuguese language more than it simplified it and now this can be written without the mark also, I think), like in Romanian Socionica with that mark in the last 'a'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vero

Here's an Se ego, Ne polr anecdote.

My EXE best friend is dating an Se-LSI. This LSI wants to go into law school but he's seriously struggling to get the top grades he needs on his LSATs. He's a very argumentative sort, constructing excellent arguments that are firm in their position and demonstrate his clear outlook on a situation. He uses evidence to make a very concrete case for whatever position he takes (and is willing to argue more than one side if necessary).

However, he struggles at shutting down all the loopholes. When he reads a paragraph of information he's very good at picking out what is relevant, what is there, and what can be used to build his case. His difficulty comes at seeing what isn't there, what could be the case, and the innumerable ways to manipulate the evidence to come out with a different conclusion.

He wants to pursue contract law and comes from the perspective of making the rules or making the boundaries. He's good at observing the rules. He's good at constructing those rules. He's good at working with the rules. He's not as good at thinking of all the ways those rules can be broken or manipulated on a technicality.

---

He´d be a decent lawyer, but not top, probably...anyway, few people make it to the top of any carreer.

socionics

soc-ion-ics

soc = social
ion = state of being
ic = pertaining to (adj)
ics = body of knowledge/principles/facts pertaining to(noun)
ica = not an English suffix

socionic = pertaining to the state of being social (adjective)
socionics = body of knowledge/principles/facts pertaining to the state of being social (noun)
socionica = word that does not hold to rules of the english language = can only hold meaning in a direct link between signifier and signified

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

I know my way around because I study Socionica every fucking day at least one hour per day since I got to know it.

---

That's some commitment if you know what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

I´m not that guy, I´m another guy, but I am a friend of the guy you mention, Sharrum, it was him who introduced me to Socionica, we met in an Enneagram forum

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

I liked his ****** quote, so I copied it. He never cited the Buddha, though.

---

Yeah, I knew I saw it somewhere. He seems to have quite an impact on you. Is he still around ? Does he have any connection to that Dalai Lama master as well ?

Removed at User Request

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

thanks for the recommendation, but I don´t like Economics. It´s mostly crap which has lead the world to these crisis. So I dream of a day where all these books about Economy will be burned and a new system implemented, less capitalist, and more socialist, although leaning more towards capitalism, as was Fascism for example.

---

I know the old Ne PoLR is probably giving you a false sense of confidence, but trust me, you're wrong about the economy and the current global economic situation. Read that book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by discojoe

I know the old Ne PoLR is probably giving you a false sense of confidence, but trust me, you're wrong about the economy and the current global economic situation. Read that book.

---

Ne valuer gives advice to Ne PoLR... I wonder who will listen?
There are more books than that one about current economic situation, dear discojoe.... with different messages... And which one says the truth? The one which is closest to kissing your fat capitalistic ass?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sarinana

Ne valuer gives advice to Ne PoLR... I wonder who will listen?
There are more books than that one about current economic situation, dear discojoe.... with different messages... And which one says the truth? The one which is closest to kissing your fat capitalistic ass?

---

Who in their right mind typed you EIE if you say somethng like that and mean it ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absurd

Who in their right mind typed you EIE if you say somethng like that and mean it ?

---

Probably he was an identical of the person who invented God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sarinana

Probably he was an identical of the person who invented God.

---

If you mean that desert god, someone who invented him must of been a one cruel bastard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sarinana

Ne valuer gives advice to Ne PoLR... I wonder who will listen?
There are more books than that one about current economic situation, dear discojoe.... with different messages... And which one says the truth? The one which is closest to kissing your fat capitalistic ass?

---

Typical weak Te compensatory comment by silly NF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by discojoe

I know the old Ne PoLR is probably giving you a false sense of confidence, but trust me, you're wrong about the economy and the current global economic situation. Read that book.

---

Who´s Ne PoLR you speak of here? I´m Ni PoLR as an ESTj. But let´s suppose I´m an ISTj (Ne PoLR), how´d that give me a false sense of confidence?

(talking abt socionika now, we can talk abt economy later.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

Who´s Ne PoLR you speak of here? I´m Ni PoLR as an ESTj. But let´s suppose I´m an ISTj (Ne PoLR), how´d that give me a false sense of confidence?

(talking abt socionika now, we can talk abt economy later.)

---

Ne PoLR will make you certain that something is true simply because it makes sense to you. You don't really care about hearing other perspectives, you just shut out all outside information and assume that you are correct, simply because you can defend any part of your belief from within.

Of course, the extent to which this is true will vary between individuals. I grew up with an ILE older brother, so I'm generally not confident merely using Ti to defend something. I keep it internal and mainly use it to pick out contradictions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vero

socionics

soc-ion-ics

soc = social
ion = state of being
ic = pertaining to (adj)
ics = body of knowledge/principles/facts pertaining to(noun)
ica = not an English suffix

socionic = pertaining to the state of being social (adjective)
socionics = body of knowledge/principles/facts pertaining to the state of being social (noun)
socionica = word that does not hold to rules of the english language = can only hold meaning in a direct link between signifier and signified

---

ion mean economics, so Socionics is economics of human societies or social economics, to be more exact and correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

Se egoes like to move things, physical objects, to take them and move them.

In terms of moving objects and applying force to affect their surroundings, Se/Ti egoes do this a lot more than Te/Si leadings. Beta STs move things more than Delta STs.

They are also more ready for immediate action than an ESTJ or an ISTP.

If you still have your own peculiar understanding of Socionica, then here it is from wikisocion what you should learn.

---

I'd be interested in seeing what information you've dug-up that indicates that LSE's are less proactive or less capable of action than LSI's. This should be interesting

Quote:

---

as they are active people who think clearly on the move and tend to be unsatisfied with a stationary, peaceful lifestyle.

---

You neglected what I posted previously about the use of Se and Si varying by type, not be IE values. I'm not debating against the notion that SLE's are in any way immobile, what I did state, as does the text you quoted, is that SLE's use this mobility sporadically, it's inconsistent, aka not "stationary".
LSI do not possess the same level of energy as an SLE, thus they do not use Se to the same intensity an Se dominant can

If you want links, here's ones describing the differences between the temperaments
IJ temperament - Wikisocion
EP temperament - Wikisocion
EJ temperament - Wikisocion
IP temperament - Wikisocion

Quote:

---

"LSIs prefer to apply their clear, logical thinking to forcibly affect how the real world is organized, rather than simply producing conjectures or thought exercises that have no material application. LSIs prefer to work with systems of "real" things — material assets, organizations, management, and production — and to perfect their structure and organization (Ti). When they are certain they are right, LSIs can act decisively to enforce rules, and, if necessary, to punish violators, in order to protect the integrity of the system.

LSIs handle high-pressure situations well and can maneuver skillfully around obstacles to achieve their goals. They cannot be intimidated easily by displays of force or aggression, but follow closely the balance of power and make sure they are in the best position."

---

This doesn't even contradict what I posted. You seem to be assuming that because LSI's are pragmatics and can easily maneuver people that they must possess the sort of external drive that you have associated with all Se ego's.

You're ignoring that the demonstrative function is the second easiest to use after the base; Se creatives can easily indulge in Si, even though it isn't a valued IE.

Another poor argument you made is that LSE's and SLI's place an equal priority on Si and Se, which goes with what I posted about the demonstrative function and what I just explained about temperament differences

Quote:

---

What is in bold is what you should learn about Socionica instead of talking your own theories which clearly come from other universes.

---

You didn't prove anything to me in this post except that you can manipulate information to suit your own understanding

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marie84

I'd be interested in seeing what information you've dug-up that indicates that LSE's are less proactive or less capable of action than LSI's. This should be interesting

---

I DID NOT SAY THAT, DO NOT TWIST MY WORDS.
I SAID THAT LSI AND SLE ARE MORE READY AND COLLECTED FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION THAN LSE. THIS IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE SE IN EGO BLOCK AND THIS IS WRITTEN IN WIKISOCION SO IF YOU DISAGREE ARGUE WITH THE PEOPLE WHO WRITE WIKISOCION.

Quote:

---

You neglected what I posted previously about the use of Se and Si varying by type, not be IE values. I'm not debating against the notion that SLE's are in any way immobile, what I did state, as does the text you quoted, is that SLE's use this mobility sporadically, it's inconsistent, aka not "stationary".

---

I really was not able to understand much of your text. Somehow INFJs have trouble in putting into words their thoughts. But anyway I´m gonna answer you. SLE IS NOT SATISFIED WITH A PEACEFUL, STATIONARY LIFESTYLE. PERIOD. STATIONARY = STOPPED, TRANQUIL, EASED. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THEY MOBILIZE. IT HAS TO DO WITH THEIR LIFESTYLE.

Quote:

---

LSI do not possess the same level of energy as an SLE, thus they do not use Se to the same intensity an Se dominant can

---

That is something you and I can agree on.

Quote:

---

If you want links, here's ones describing the differences between the temperaments
IJ temperament - Wikisocion
EP temperament - Wikisocion
EJ temperament - Wikisocion
IP temperament - Wikisocion

---

LOL, I´VE ALREADY READ THEM ALL AND ALL OF FUCKING WIKISOCION.

Quote:

---

This doesn't even contradict what I posted. You seem to be assuming that because LSI's are pragmatics and can easily maneuver people that they must possess the sort of external drive that you have associated with all Se ego's.

---

Another point in which I admit you can be right.

Quote:

---

You're ignoring that the demonstrative function is the second easiest to use after the base; Se creatives can easily indulge in Si, even though it isn't a valued IE.

Another poor argument you made is that LSE's and SLI's place an equal priority on Si and Se, which goes with what I posted about the demonstrative function and what I just explained about temperament differences

---

I didn´t say that Delta STs place EQUAL PRIORITY ON Se AND Si, I SAID THEY USE MUCH MORE Si THAN Se. READ AGAIN.

:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

You didn't prove anything to me in this post except that you can manipulate information to suit your own understanding

---

Who said I wanted to prove something to you? I don´t have to. I just want to discuss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

I DID NOT SAY THAT, DO NOT TWIST MY WORDS.
I SAID THAT LSI AND SLE ARE MORE READY AND COLLECTED FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION THAN LSE. THIS IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE SE IN EGO BLOCK AND THIS IS WRITTEN IN WIKISOCION SO IF YOU DISAGREE ARGUE WITH THE PEOPLE WHO WRITE WIKISOCION.

---

*sigh* once again, an explanation on functions vs. IE values went completely over your head

I'll try to explain this, one last time, as simply as possible.

The easiest functions to use are the base, followed by the demonstrative than the creative.
In LSE's this is Te>Se
In SLE's this is Se>Te
In LSI's this is Ti>Si
etc

The demonstrative function is not valued even though it's the second easiest to use. The creative function, though valued, is used more sporadically. The priority still remains on the base function, thus in the case of an LSE and LIE, they're driven by Te not Si or Ni.

Since you've stated to reading the entire Wiki, I'd presume you didn't miss how Si manifests in Si creatives:

Quote:

---

The individual is naturally good at organizing relaxing activities and recreation and making sure people are calm and enjoying themselves, but displays this behavior and skill when he sees a specific need for it rather than doing it automatically, all the time. The individual does not place emphasis on being calm and balanced all the time, as opposed to those with Si as a leading function.

---

And another, IMO, realistic and to the point discription for LSE at socionics.ws

Quote:

---

...They are naturally proactive and can without difficulty take charge of a project to ensure that their brand of detailed and high-quality work is implemented. They may become restless when they have no work to focus themselves on...

...They tend to be perpetually in motion, and may feel restless, dejected, and unproductive if forced to suspend their activities...

---

This is one of the defining differences between a TeSi and an SiTe. LSE's are primarily concerned with being productive, accomplishing tasks in the real world; there's a reason why they're stereotyped as workaholics and busy bodies, and from experience with a few, they enjoy this way of life.

Quote:

---

I really was not able to understand much of your text. Somehow INFJs have trouble in putting into words their thoughts. But anyway I´m gonna answer you. SLE IS NOT SATISFIED WITH A PEACEFUL, STATIONARY LIFESTYLE. PERIOD. STATIONARY = STOPPED, TRANQUIL, EASED. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THEY MOBILIZE. IT HAS TO DO WITH THEIR LIFESTYLE.

---

Thank you again for ignoring everything I previously posted :indifferent:
I *never* stated that SLE's are stationary people

Repost:

Quote:

---

You neglected what I posted previously about the use of Se and Si varying by type, not be IE values. I'm not debating against the notion that SLE's are in any way immobile, what I did state, as does the text you quoted, is that SLE's use this mobility sporadically, it's inconsistent, aka not "stationary".
LSI do not possess the same level of energy as an SLE, thus they do not use Se to the same intensity an Se dominant can

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa33

ion mean economics, so Socionics is economics of human societies or social economics, to be more exact and correct.

---

Your first statement is simply wrong, and your last statement is the opposite of what is true. The suffix "-ion" has nothing to do with economics. Where the English language is concerned, the above statement is entirely wrong and probably just an assumption you made. Lastly, there is nothing more exact and correct than breaking the word down to its individual parts and demonstrating what each of those parts means.

-ion means "the state of being", -ics means "a body of knowledge/principles/facts pertaining to" and soc is the root of the word social, society, etc.,

Therefore, to be exact and correct, socionics means "A body of knowledge/principles/facts pertaining to the state of being social"

WHERE IS THE POST IN WHICH I ASK FOR THE BANNING OF FORUM MEMBER 'ABSURD' AFTER HIS HOSTILITIES? WERE THESE POSTS DELETED? WHO DELETED THEM AND WHY?

WHY DOES THIS GUY 'ABSURD' HAVE PRIVILEGES HERE? HE CAN BE AN ASSHOLE AND NOTHING HAPPENS. I WONDER HOW MANY TIMES A DAY HE SUCKS THE ADMINISTRATORS´ DICKS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airborne

WHERE IS THE POST IN WHICH I ASK FOR THE BANNING OF FORUM MEMBER 'ABSURD' AFTER HIS HOSTILITIES? WERE THESE POSTS DELETED? WHO DELETED THEM AND WHY?

WHY DOES THIS GUY 'ABSURD' HAVE PRIVILEGES HERE? HE CAN BE AN ASSHOLE AND NOTHING HAPPENS. I WONDER HOW MANY TIMES A DAY HE SUCKS THE ADMINISTRATORS´ DICKS.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-rJ-6hBfSo