I'm trying to type a friend and I can't decide which one of these he is; both types have a sense of humor, both are into humor. There are so many commonalities that I can't decided which one he is.
Printable View
I'm trying to type a friend and I can't decide which one of these he is; both types have a sense of humor, both are into humor. There are so many commonalities that I can't decided which one he is.
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/o...-1274-1752.jpg
Tom Cruise = ESFj
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/o...ter-laugh3.jpg
Herman Munster = ESTj :biggrin:
@Maritsa, how many types have good sense of humor?
Hmm, ESFj or ESTj, not sure if I can relate. :P Well if you want our help, at least provide some more information. What type of things do they joke about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
i would say both types can have good senses of humor, and be animated & smiley. this might be applicable to all Ej temperament types due to having extraverted dynamic elements - Fe (expression, motivation, emotional influence, etc.) & Te (beneficial action, activity, movement, etc.) - as their Base and Role functions.
my observations of these types IRL:
ESE: socially smooth like nobody's business - always know the right thing to say and how to respond to people. know a ton of people, easily connect and make friends. loud and will freely express their emotions (both positive & negative). dress fashionably and with taste. can be generous (e.g. buying drinks for the group at a bar) and thus end up spending too much money.
LSE: not as confident at expressing their real emotions (unlike ESE) so may do things like let their anger build up inside and eventually rage all at once. i often see male LSEs wearing a similar kind of outfit every single day that is basic, functional, & not terribly fashionable. typically cheap & don't like spending money.
both types may look like social butterflies but the difference is that socializing, having fun, and being around people is actually the ESE's goal, while the LSE's real reason for it is often because it's beneficial to their interests or their work or something.
Thanks Glam, but none of this helps.Quote:
Originally Posted by glam
For instance, my sister and cousin are both ESE and so are a ton of my friends; the only things that I notice to be different between the ESE and LSE is that LSE will say the right things in a given situation, when they say it that becomes non argumentative; ESE just let their thoughts about something flow easily and these thoughts are usually their ethics regarding what people are doing that may be considered right or wrong.
LSE come off more insecure, IMO, but there's exception to this as well, an LSE who just doesn't care about how he's perceived may come off aggressive, direct, non ethical; an LSE who has money can dress to the 9's, just as an ESE would; they are both aesthetic and both want nice/pleasant surrounding.
His humor is much closer to that of Sean Penn, "I say they should all be shot." It's more direct, violent approach as opposed to more sarcasm.
Looking at this from DS, I would think that ESE are much more emotional than cold and logical, like LSE, but there again come situations where the LSE becomes emotionally expressive; there are too many cross variables to consider if I'm, or we're going to look at this behaviorally.
The only time I see an LSE's Fe is when they're drunk, having some "I love you man!" moment and reminscing about things. And I can stay quiet around it without them getting too butthurt.
I don't know about that; my LSE cousin is pretty darn emotional even when not drunk; she was hosting an oscar party one year and one of my cousins begrudgingly decided not to show up. My ESE sister said "If she doesn't want to come, that's her business, leave her make her own decisions." But, wanting closeness and family, my LSE cousin called her up and got very emotional on the phone, cried about why when she invites people they just won't put their differences aside and show up.
Her tender, crying emotions show up every once in a while. I don't know how this is different from Fe?
That sounds like it has more to do with control than Fe per se.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I don't get it; these two types have only a few similarities
Ej temperament
and 4 Dichotomies
in common yet they behave and look so much the same especially if they are very close together in their grey zones.
really? what do you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by stray
It just sounds like she was upset because her event didn't go as planned. Maybe her annoyance wasn't about the people specifically, but the event itself. If there's something that pisses off LSE and LSI, I think it's when unpredictable things happen like that. And her emotions seem to be only about herself in that case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
Yes, exactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by stray
Yes, she's hardly ever annoyed by the people, more about her event, her plans, things going according to her routine.Quote:
Originally Posted by stray
But how does this differ from ESE?
Stay, I'm again over demanding Te from you :p (trying to get you to tell me what actions are taking place and how)
I'm sorry...take your time and try to interpret later if that wears on you :) (I feel like I can be exhausting to my activity relations because of this constant need for that)
Yeah, I'm not really into answering all of this.. I'll try though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I'm sure an LSE would be better explaining how they differ from ESE. I think though that they would view events like this from an operational standpoint first. Even the people involved are parts of an operation. They might choreograph on how it all should run in their heads. It's a singular unit. If it breaks down, that's what pissing them off. Also, if someone didn't show up, they're not going to interpret it strictly from some relational point of view either. None of the "Since so and so did this, this is what our friendship means now.." They'll probably be friends, but just see that person as unreliable or a waste of time. The qualities they assign to them probably wouldn't be too personal.
Because of weaker Fe, the LSE is not inclined to just trust anyone; is this true of ESE's Fe? I thought Fe was involved in monitoring the behaviors/manners and honesty of others and because of this would be more inclined to pick and choose who they trust.Quote:
Originally Posted by stray
I never thought your boyfriend was an LSE. By his look and his occupation, he is obviously a feeler. But absurd strongly advised me against confronting you over this. I remember he grabbed my arm and said "Let it go, let it go son, we do not need this fight!" and so I backed off making a thread about Maritas alleged LSE boyfriend. Perhaps next time, I will intrude!
Visually, they are extremely close and he's the first guy in a long time who's treated me GREAT. I should have known that LSE would not compare; but the differences came out when I suggested efficient ways of doing things and he didn't change them because he preferred doing thing the way that felt comfortable to him; this wasn't a major problem until his uncontrollable emotions interjected and where I ignored them rather than using logic and rationality to make him understand; his semi preference for doing things efficiently and for not evaluating the quality of things also started to lose my interest. He's the most Te of all ESE I've ever met and certainly his humor sustained my interest.
This should perhaps go to show all of you that I'm EII and no I'm not LII; and I don't want to be pestered about being an Alpha any more. And, Fi isn't to have parties and invite people over to host things with them to create relationships; there are anti social ESE and Fi doesn't do a damn thing for them.
Tell a joke. If they laugh and don't get it, ESE.
A few thoughts:Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
* I am sincerely sorry that your relationship did not work out.
* It's annoying that you saw him as LSE while it was working and he evidently has to be un-LSEd if it did not work.
* You have been so rude and belittling and flat-out bizarre to so many people on this forum over claiming that you know their type via online interaction. And you are now saying you could not type LSE versus ESE in person day after day? Galling.
It's easier to ask tough probing questions on line because you don't have to love the person and show them affection while you do so.
And Confirmed, you don't have to make a festival of someone else's sadness. And, like I said, the similarities were extremely striking that only after a particular event did I note that something was not coming together correctly.
You can't exactly use Socionics as an indication of a individuals levels of trust - too many variables to consider. Take into consideration personality disorders that interrupt a persons natural state of being.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
Your boyfriend? I beg to differ - at least from the couple of times I heard him speak to you on cam. No woman should really be spoken to in such a rude manner. You should have ended it a few months back when I first said something in Tinychat; the inevitable result was just prolonged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I'm also sorry Martisa that your relationship didn't work out .
It doesn't really matter on that point if he's LSE or ESE in my opinion. It could well not work out if he was LSE. There are dual couples that split up. Yet, there are conflictors who stay together no matter what.
On side note, I've noticed some male ESFj come off ESTj-ish whereas the opposite goes for females. The reason of course is simple - man are not expected to show too much emotion.
I'm also worried that you put too much emphasis on socionics. Do you think you could be happy with somebody who isn't your dual? I believe it's extremely possible. There are many types we are compatible with. E.g. it I don't feel my duals are my soulmates. I feel more connected to people who share one trait with me, especially Fi - when we double it, it's like hmm we totally immerse each other into it. To me it's soulmating.
a very Te ESE?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
It's amazing the rationalizations people come up with to negate the very simple fact that they suck at typing. Revise your conceptions of the types, I've been telling you this for awhile. There's no 'very Te ESE'.
There are in fact "very Te ESEs" as any type can be "very Te" or "very X". That's why we need subtypes. It's a common mistyping to mix strong subtype with ego.Quote:
Originally Posted by thePirate
Anna Anka, Swedish ex wife of Paul Anka and television "star". She is a "very Te ESE" (Te-Dominant subtype)
She is a bit crazy, but fun to watch. English subtitles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vssbz...eature=related
Here you can also see her with her children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-99eleRvGko
oh god. you know what this means, if this is true. my husband is LSE. It's an idea I've been tossing around for awhile now. Not that it changes anything, or matters much. Not super surprising when all's said and done.Quote:
Originally Posted by glam
wait, I think they're back together?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ver
Role function is subpar even when strengthened by subtype.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowisthetime
so he's LSE again?..:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
the swedish lady creeped me out. she is exactly the type of person i stay away from, she's essentially a bully. and though she may have a great body her face looks like a skeleton.
Yes; there's no telling to what degree each of the functions are developed in an individual; I believe that I picked an ESE that was so developed in Te made him sound, look, act very much like an LSE; everything from humor, saying, mannerisms, to looks. It was surprising even to me. So the reason why I settled on ESE was because of typical orientation was more Fe than Te. This is where there was more Fe going on when there was supposed to be Te, that caused certain strains and frustrations on my part until I got to thinking "wait, what's going on here."Quote:
Originally Posted by thePirate
Yeah, because of my experience with ESE, up close and personal, I'm pretty convinced you may be ESE.Quote:
Originally Posted by thePirate
ESE's have Fi as their ignoring function. They value Ti. Think of Penny, a charcter from "The Big Bang Theory", a dramtazed ESE. She is slighty intrugued by Leonards Ti, as are most characters in that show. For example:
"Function 7 - observant, or ignoring, or restricting function, the function of personal knowledge. This is a strong (3D according to Ermak) but unconscious function. One generally has a good grasp of this function, but attempts to limit its use considerably. Individuals will disregard this function when an argument calls for restraint or when it will be difficult to indulge in its essence. At the same time one uses this function to restrict somebody's intervention to their privacy or territory, or other unsolicited interaction."
"ESEs are naturally interested in other people and relational connections; however, they may often tend to express their experience of these bonds with extravagant and colorful displays of affection and emotionality. They are often less concerned with focusing on the nature of the bond itself than on its outward expressions, and may take it for granted that emotions are reflected by one's expression; they may thus more commonly focus on the signals and body langage that others provide about their emotional receptiveness to the circumstance, as opposed to the content or context of the interaction. They often have a minimal understanding of introspective, subdued, internally-derived emotional states that are not observably expressed -- instead, they may tend to assume (wrongly) that everyone around them is driven to act as they are by highly potent and palpable emotional experiences, and that if individuals are reticent or standoffish, their emotions are merely hiding under the surface, waiting to be expressed (though they are sometimes inclined to attribute others' inaction to some manner of physical incapacity or discomfort instead). Do not people with strong Fi as a base do this very behavior often? In my experince of ESE's can be very confused when I do this...as if I am purposely trying to behave grouchy.
ESEs commonly have an all-inclusive attitude towards others that bears little room for ethically judgmental attitudes, or individually directed sentiments towards others. At times, they may be drawn into personal criticism; but more commonly they avoid ethical confrontations towards others and may seek to maintain a mood of harmony and happiness. They may become bored if the atmosphere around them becomes overly subdued, with frank discussions of others' character. A behavior LSE's participate in.
ESEs may often have an appreciation for the rules for interacting socially, and may criticize others who fail to follow accepted ettiquette and standards of politeness. They may see individuals who are more nonconformist and self-assertive, or who fail to follow established rules or environmental social norms, as necessarily mean and unfriendly -- they may operate with this type of collectivistic mindset, and may not be able to easily recognize or appreciate a more individuated and self-deterministic style of ethical values."
This may have the effect of making your ESFJ a little sensitive to those people he deems to be "mean".
He seemed to be LSE from speech:
"I approve."
"That works."
etc what gave off ESE is that LSE can make a lot of decisions and Matt was asking me to tell him what he should do in certain situations; that recalled the dual description of his duality and recalled that it was probably ESE more so than LSE
The Fi ignoring isn't so apparent because ESE appreciate good/honest/trustworthy people and can rationalize a lot about them away when they love them and want to take care of them.
Very true I have noticed this in close ESE's as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Honestly, I hate to say this, but ESE unlike LSE are not that concerned about TeSi; they focus more on the people in their vicinity, in reading their emtionality, whereas the LSE is more likely to focus on Te, thoughts, activity of objects in their environment, and LSE do more organizing work than an ESE. It was just a difference in shifting weight; more weight was shifted to Fe instead of Te, and because of that Ti become more involved, making it more uncomfortable for me to "handle the situation."
On planet Earth, she is just a clear-cut LSE. One of the most typical LSE celebrities I've ever seen - O'Reilly does not count, let's blame that on his religiousness and traditionalism :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowisthetime
I have watched her a lot, she got famous through the series "Swedish Hollywood-wives. She is in fact 100% ESE. I think you would see it also if you understood Swedish. But I guess it is pointless to argue about her type now.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ineffable
I am bold enough to make the outrageous presumption that, when they translated her - sometimes she speaks plain English -, they haven't translated her Fe into Te, neither they edited her appearance and movements... Indeed it is pointless to argue about her type when we talk in terms of Model A, there exists no reason at all to type her Fe Ego. To be clear, I'm not talking about the "Dominant" Super-Id Blah-BLAh subtype system that you use, but of Socionics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowisthetime
I couldn't find any threads on differentiating these two types. From your experience what would you say are the most telling differences? I'm primarily looking for personal accounts and stories and nuances of character for this thread, not as much traits derived from pure theory. If you were to try to explain to someone who is completely new how to spot people of these types - how would you describe them?
I only really know females of these types (minus my LSE dad) so that's who I'll talk about.
ESE's exude a more organic warmth, whereas LSE's exude more of a crisper, sustained bubbliness, from my point of view.
A lot of LSE women use Fe-role very much and it comes across like they are super excited about everything, whereas ESE women have smoother transitions between their emotions.
If you pay attention to the content of LSE's speech they are often constantly asking about things like "How did you make that dish?" "How many people are already enrolled in this class?" "So your purpose for coming here primarily is to meet more people?" "How are you going to get to location b on Sunday- do you need a ride?" They also take a lot of pride in finagling something in a creative way using Te, so they will tell stories in which they did something using a strange method and cut steps but it came out fantastic, etc. Or proudly say things like, "I came to this party bringing just the wine I had left over in my house... it needed to be drunk anyway! So actually I didn't purchase anything!" Or, "I know the department gives us funding to go to [conference in April]. I think we could just apply for the money and then use it to take a small vacation... I've been thinking about inviting you guys to my childhood home."
ESE's are a bit more...alpha flavored I guess. They are a bit more likely to spend more time talking passionately about "frivolous" things like clothes and Miyazaki movies and be not averse to sci-fi/ fantasy. They can sometimes use Te-role a lot too, but you know that at the end of the day they're reading and responding to emotional signals. Sometimes they get overly emotional and I ignore them by withdrawing into what I consider "pure Si" mode until the mood passes. Conversation topics revolve more about people, friends, their jobs, etc, than larger societal trends that cause a economic shift with bad humanistic implications or whatever- more SF type topics. Even for so-firsts, it seems that you still focus on these "people" topics just on a larger scale.
LSE's often come across to me as "cool and hip" whereas ESE's come across more as "girlish and interpersonal." To me LSE's come across as having a more classically "boyish" air or a mix of feminine and masculine qualities whereas ESE's are classically feminine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWE6QfNkQBE
Willie Robertson (LSE)
Sadie Robertson (ESE)
also, Si Robertson (IEE)
My mom is an ESE. From a (probable) Te/Fi user's perspective, it appears to me as though an invisible stormcloud of rapidly changing emotions follows her everywhere. My Fe is very primitive, so I will usually show either 1) no affect at all or 2) extremely exaggerated gestures like eye-rolls when I'm frustrated. It causes a lot of conflict. She's very lighthearted (the thing about Alphas being perpetually very childlike is true of her). As an objective ethics user, her morality comes from an objective source that she received when she was a child (Catholic dogma), and this often causes conflict, as my moral map is a wonky mishmash of rules of thumb I've made up on the fly. A good example of a conflict situation between us is when we go to Disney World, a favorite vacation spot of hers. For her, it's "the happiest place on Earth" (Fe), while I personally am sick of it because I've been so many times (Fi). She's always happy the whole time we are there because that's the objective emotional atmosphere, which I have trouble meeting.
One of my professors from this past year was an LSE. His Te base makes him intimidating when you first meet him, even for me, a Te valuer. His class was tough, as he is able to retain huge amounts of historical data, and expects you to do the same. The thing about Deltas being the eldest quadra makes sense for him; where I can easily see what my mother was like as a child, for him, it seems as though wise old age was his time of ripening. He's a Christian, but, unlike my mother, who accepts everything in the Bible on blind faith due to strong Fe and weak Te, he is very academically detached from the text, and has a highly personalized, ineffable system which guides his reading. Still, he respects the information as time tested (Te). Despite being a intensely hard worker, you can see his inner INFj hippie sometimes. It's pretty obvious he furiously dreams of a pastoral communist utopia. He's always wearing business attire, per the ESTj stereotype.
Here's how you spot the difference. ESFjs will be childlike, cheerful, and not really intimidating. ESTjs will be mature, formal, and are kind of scary when you first meet them. ESFjs are your stereotypical nuclear family mom, and ESTjs are your stereotypical nuclear family dad (with apologies to male ESFjs and female ESTjs). Both may be conservative in outlook due to heavy Si, but this is not mandatory.
LSE's often seem pretty hippy to me haha. There are plenty who are into drugs. They are also really great at multitasking and have good memories, so they can do their homework on the train to another city, party all night while there, study for a test on the way back...Quote:
Originally Posted by Whoobie77
They can also "Te on the fly," meaning they cam get themselves into extreme situations but still figure out where they need to go.
I knew an LSE woman who works in nonprofits but used to be a first mate on a ship, and had gone fishing with native tribes in Alaska cutting giant fish's throats open with a pocket knife or something. Another who spent a semester abroad in a Buddhist monastery and was really into WWOOF, and had lived off of food stamps at some point (I think as a comfortable practical alternative) while working in a cheese shop and pursuing creative outlets. Another who picked up a semi-feral cat while traveling through Southeast Asia and bribed some people for the proper paperwork to transport back to North America...
There is definitely the other variety though.
Yeah, I know what you mean. The LSE I described in my last post is also a part time archaeologist who hangs around in transitive Palestine tribes when he goes over to the Middle East. And I had LSE middle school teacher/scoutmaster. He was ex-military and had a Spartan helmet tattooted on his right arm. He'd take us out in the woods and be like "THIS IS SPARTA!" and would push us to develop the technical skills to fend for ourselves, while also still having a kind of paternalistic protectiveness that was willing to help when we really needed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by lemontrees
ESE's don't understand the joke and laugh.
LSE's don't understand the joke and don't.
In discussion an ESE can get heated really fast and bring their voice up too loud. An LSE draws their voice down on purpose to draw someone into a discussion and if things get heated instead of sticking around and rousing more emotional outbursts, which they dislike, they will simply leave.
LSE vs ESE. Any LSEs here; if you know ahead of time that you gotta fight an ESE, I'll walk through hell and back with you and train the shit out of you until you can absolutely steamroll the fucker without even quickening your pulse. :p
From where I stand, it just feels like LSEs have their shit together in general, and are more chill. If we find a subject to connect on, we can talk about the ins and outs of it for hours, and then hopefully get some cool shit done as a result of the convo. With me and the ESEs, it's like there's a constant stream of noise, confusion, and drama from their end and it's pure hell to deal with. I begin to envy the deaf, and this is coming from someone who once stayed up 50 hours in a row to get just the right sound when producing for a local band for free. One of the ESEs had to have been arbitrarily categorizing everything around him, and he made wild guesses about shit, hung sheets of paper with cheesy little quotes and mantras all over the place for fuck knows why, literally paraded around a room in a sea of confusion that I suspect he built all by himself, and I swear, I feel like those people just talk so they can hear the sound of their own head roar and make everyone else hear it too. Terrible.
If this is all sounding negative overall, those are my experiences, and I know someone other than me would make sense of whatever it is they do and have a good time with it. I kinda feel bad that I'm not able to do that myself regularly. It's also possible that I just happened to run into a bunch of real shitheads.
nice observation :) you must have first-hand experience with ESEQuote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
I dated them because I couldn't find LSE and about half the women in my family are ESE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johannes Bloem
Woooa. You really need to send me some of your LSEs. I've only ever met maybe two that were like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by lemontrees
Haaaaah. I can identify with some of this. My mother is a very bouncy person who can be very thoughtful and who loves to do things for others even at her own expense (time, energy, money, etc). That's not to say she is a pushover; she has often gotten frustrated with my stepfather because she expects him to be "a man" and to take care of issues like neglectful renters and the like, and she finds him way too lenient when he should be putting his foot down. (He apparently had the same problem at his job and was eventually pulled from the supervisor position they'd put him in.) I find her excessively concerned about what others think, to the point that she'll tone herself down to avoid disapproval. She's very witty and mouthy. She will walk around in public singing random ditties she made up on the fly. It's a lot of fun watching movies with her because of her snarky comments. She's incredibly good with math and teaches it at a local college, and she's the one who handles the family finances (Dad sometimes has to call her and make sure which card to use for certain things like getting gas). She's also occasionally sulky, sometimes highly irrational and over-emotional, and prone to yelling/screaming when particularly pissed off. She also has a relatively wide controlling streak. She slept with a lot of people in her younger days, and she was so freaked out about the possibility that I might turn out like her that she flipped out on me when I was nine years old because it came up that I mentioned liking a boy. Seriously, she made me stay away from those friends after that. My absolute lack of experience with the opposite sex led to a situation in adulthood where I ended up stabbed in the back by a close friend precisely because I had no experience and was too naive to understand what was going on around me. Her views on sex are absolutely Puritan, and she doesn't seem to understand that if she teaches her kids that sex is bad and icky, they're not going to magically transform on their wedding night (should they wait that long for sex, as she wishes) and suddenly have sex without any hangups just because it's now in the proper context. (Weak :Ni:, maybe?) I've gotten to the point where I'm tired of walking on eggshells around her and tired of catering to her emotional bullshit. I've heard her yell "Divorce!" enough times that I tend to just wait and see now whether she actually means it. I feel sorry for some of the crap she has to put up with, but that doesn't mean I absolve her of all responsibility for her poor choices. She's getting better, but I think she's been a good example of an unhealthy ESE. Those are not fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by woofwoofl
I know females and males of both types, but mostly ESEs females.
When it comes to decorating, the LSE will make suggestions and, if nobody disapproves, act on them. The ESE will eagerly exclaim what she thinks would be good and seems more interesting in collecting ideas to add to her own than in discounting her own suggestion. I think this is a positivist/negativist example.
I've had both LSE and ESE male teachers. The ESEs were more fun and prone to telling jokes. Both would poke fun at students they knew wouldn't mind. The LSE had a more set order of doing things, but that could be attributed to his being older than they.
I think the alpha/delta difference is a bigger one than the thinking/feeling difference. I know an ESE-Si who's been dualized and doesn't portray Fe as exuberantly as other ESE women, and I know an LSE-Si lady who isn't as obviously Te as I am.
ESEs are more focused on the feelings and mood of the whole room, whereas LSEs are disinterested in that but may be interested in their own feelings or those of a few individuals near them.
Ye, they're somewhat gay in a feminine sense of the word.Quote:
Originally Posted by lemontrees
My last long term relationship was with an ESE. My current is with an LSE. I think the outwardly the similarities between these two is way more apparent then the differences. Which makes sense being that they are Look-a-likes.
I think if you met any of these people in more formal settings they would be very professional. I think that's the nice thing about LSE's- they are often more responsible (than ESE, SEI) and can really go both ways. :) Which is to say, hopefully some of the ones you know secretly have that in them...Quote:
Originally Posted by Agarina
I'll def trade you some for some ILE's!
^^^Some of my best teachers were LSEs. A bit too conventional for my taste, but organized and competent. Demanding and efficient overall. I haven´t interacted with many ESEs irl ...I think 1 or 2 on more or less formal occasions. In study contexts, I´ve noticed ESE relies much more on the "ready-made" opinions of people in positions of authority (aka teachers) than on their own ideas.
As a (tenuously) fellow Gamma, I I.D. with so much of this. -Fe wants to live in a land where people don't have bad or Dionysian sides, and -Fi wants to eliminate extraneous elements of their ethical persona. So an Alpha rational parent (Fe, Ne, and Ti) will have some weirdo platonic ideal for the Gamma kid, and the Gamma kid is just trying to get their head straight and do a pragmatic assessment of their virtues and vices. It's like oil and water.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryene Astraelis
At least in my experience.
If you think of an ESE tries to find systems that work (like books on efficient time management is a system that they will try - one is "7 Habits of Highly Efficient People") because they want to bypass the Te and achieve the result; an LSE doesn't seek this as they do look for work and do look at the process, the ESE is less geared towards finding the How's of things (where and LSE will say things like "if you want to interact with different crowds especially potentially mean ones you need to know how to speak with these people) and ESE will simply watch the cues that these people put out not necessarily having putting forethought in the method or the process. As a result type, the ESE focuses on their end objective, "I just need to go there. That's where I need to be." And LSE is more like "I need to know how to get there."
LOL. I completely concur. I want to add that LSEs in such cases will have their typical stupified look on their faces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookie
I'll give you an example of a friend who is ESE and his result screams.
So, we, I mean I was doing his taxes yesterday and I wanted to see if I could get his new car expensed under his business under title 179. So, I don't usually do this because most of the people I prepare taxes for lease their cars rather than buying them. I pulled up the IRS page on title 179 and proceeded to read it careful. I had to make a bathroom run and I asked Matt to read it and try to understand it's requirements till I came back. He was already furious that he wasn't achieving the results he wanted without having taken time to understand the rules. He was getting upset, voicing loud disappointments "how hard could this be!" "This shouldn't have to take me three hours to do!" Me, being calm and conflict avoidance, and always remaining quiet and calm (actually that alone calms him down as he sees his emotional reaction and being a feeler type observes me and feels bad for putting me through his tantrums). I asked him what he gathered from the reading and he said he didn't that he couldn't figure out the steps, he just wants to know what to do so he can do it and attain the results that he wants. While me, being a process type, picked up the article and proceeded to break it down into steps for him. I asked him from beginning to end, trying to engage him calmly, "does this apply to you? if no then we need to move ahead..." only to see him more angry and frustrated so I had to abandon a step which he didn't want to any more. Had it been my dual everything would have gone smoothly, we would have actually been more careful as to check several sources, even a direct source to make sure we understood all things clearly before proceeding. Getting something done with an ESE is hard for me as I'm often confronted with this result tendency. :) But, he's a wonderful guy and he's very caring. The Ej temperament is wonderful for someone like me. One day it will be with my dual :love:
I have an LSE mother and sister and good friend, and I've worked with several LSE's, so I'm pretty familiar with them. I'm much less familiar with ESE's. The only two I've known (superficially) have been chefs.
So there is this one guy whom I know and, for a couple years, I thought for sure that he was an LSE. He works in the building trade as an old home remodeler and let me say, this guy has Si taste. He remodeled a rental house for me and the results are amazing; modern, updated, clean and very visually appealing, while keeping within the vision that the original designer had for the place. The only thing that puzzled me about him is that he has a hard time finding work and seems to be fairly bad with money. I mean, absolutely NO LSE that I know is bad with money.
He recently hurt his leg and can't work in (re)construction anymore, and he's trying to re-invent himself at age 50. (Fortunately, his GF is totally supportive of him in this, but they don't live together, so that might help.) He asked me how I went from being a factory rat to where I am now.
While talking with him, I was struck by how similar he and I are in temperament and background. His parents are working class and he has no idea how to entrepreneur. (Neither did I, but I figured it out.) He is great with design, but when he applied to a local Art Tile company, they said he needed to know Adobe, and he told me that he doesn't own a computer and doesn't even have internet. He also said he sucks at math, and now I'm thinking that this guy has zero Te. Then he shyly admits that he was in Theater in college, and I'm trying to remember ANY LSE who even went near the theater, other than to sneak in to watch because their wives insisted that they get cultured. ("Put down that damned fishing pole and take me someplace nice.")
So here's my problem: He totally VI's LSE in my book, but I don't know many ESE's to compare him with. He's got the zero Ni thing down, and boat loads of Si, but is he just poor at showing Te and is a bona fide LSE who completely sucks at money and math, or is he an ESE who was so squashed at home (his dad was a lifer at GM) that his Fe got lost and he had to go into the manly building trades?
Incidentally, he told me that when he first goes into a house to remodel and restore it, he stands in the place for a while and tries to "feel" the house, in order to do honor to it. Maybe that's Si and could be either LSE or ESE, IDK. He's very decisive when it comes to selecting remodeling options, and he's good. The places he works on don't feel like some architect came in and put a fancy steel and glass stairway right in the middle of the living room, because, hell, it looks cool and modern. His stuff is perfectly in keeping with the nature of the house.
*EDIT*
If this guy, who seems so LSE to me, actually is an ESE, then I could understand why my LII sister married an LSE. Also, why their marriage is Not Very Good and yet has lasted.
Also, if this guy is an ESE, then he must be the Si-subtype, because while he's friendly, I, with my Role Fe, am probably much more friendly-appearing than he is.
It can be quite difficult to believe but LSE (having EIE as their super ego) seems far more casually dramatic than ESE (who most certainly has capability of being that even more). ESE is soothing even when they are always doing something. It seems to be quite big give away at least for me.
Good point. I don't find LSE's to be soothing at all. Kind of the opposite, in fact, and yet, this guy is extremely soothing. I thought that he was just a super-suppressed LSE or something, but, @Heretic 007, you make a very good argument for ESE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heretic 007