Hello, I have LIE preferences and am looking for ways to develop myself. How would I develop my intuition and sensing?
Printable View
Hello, I have LIE preferences and am looking for ways to develop myself. How would I develop my intuition and sensing?
Just no. No.
A better plan of attack would be "socionics within self-development". It gives you the option to discard socionics entirely.
To develop sensing: Drink alcoholQuote:
Originally Posted by jonkopa
To develop intuition: Smoke weed
:crispy:
LIE-s supposedly have good intuition (as described by socionics). What do you want to develop about it?
With regards to sensing, I found this very useful. My weaknesses are different from that of a person who would be best described by the LIE TIM, but try to identify actions and activities that fit the descriptions of those low dimensional functions.
The way I deal with it is by finding people who are good at it. Or I catch myself doing it (accomplishing nothing in spite of huge efforts), stop myself, and go on the internet and find the right way to do it.
With sensing I'm not certain how exactly you would go about doing that. Perhaps some self-help books on aspects described, encompassing the socionics descriptions of Se and Si?
To develop your :Ni:, become depressed.
No wonder Ni music is so depressing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Words
If you are an LIE your Ni is called a contact function. It will naturally develop with use as it reaches out and serves to integrate you into the world. Your contact functions (as a LIE) are your creative Ni, your demonstrative Ne, your suggestive Fi and your Role Fe. These grow with age, generally altogether.
Read more about this on wikisocion, the section is where the function dichotomies are explained.
Creative - Suggestive - Role - Demonstrative grow as you use the.
Lead, - Vulnerable - Mobilizing - and Ignoring are inert and are the "permanent" aspect of your personality.
Your inert functions are Te, Si, Se, Ti. They will stay much as they are now. How old are you?
I am not happy about your post; it discounts so many aspects of individual personality traits a and characteristics of all kinds of people; you almost assume that everyone, even with the knowledge of socionics has an idea about why they do the things they do... If they discard socionics and forgo a lot of understanding, not knowledge, of what happens bellow the visible scene, it would be like you saying that the world of microorganisms don't matter if you can't see them. I can say this a million times and I'm still sorry that people don't get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBeard
As for the op, why do you want to develop your Ni and Se?
Socionics: Because pretending you know because someone told you something is better than making it up from your own observations.
Socionics is obviously a very well thought out system, full of rich observations. It is by far the best personality system out there. We seem to heckle new comers, this is not good.
This is exactly the impression I got. Like the people here aren't really that into socionics and neither knowledgeable nor skilled at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saberstorm
This is a good site, a good forum, but we seem to suffer from some kind of burn out. I think their has been a kind of rebellion where cynics have become powerful here. There is good info here, and a few of the posters are knowledgeable. However, there are problems... :reallymad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tropski Bolest
Here is why I do not believe in 'self-development' and 'Self-esteem' and 'self-improvement.'
Self-development is the bias that there's something intrinsically wrong with the person that needs changing. It's a negative feedback loop however. You try to change something you don't like about yourself, only to have new things constantly show up as you live life. You start to realize you are not good enough, will never be good enough, and that you are developing yourself ironically because you are running away from an innate weakness. Something that needs 'developing' in the first place.
When will society just give up the Oprah bullshit and realize they don't need selfhelp they need HELP. Help from other people and there's no shame in that sometimes. You have to sometimes let * other people * develop you, let other people help you... or you turn into this narcissistic black hole vortex that is never satisfied. Wanting to work on yourself all the time you most definitely have to have the subconscious belief that there's something always wrong with you... and there just isn't.
I'm sorry if this is off topic. I just loathe that phrase. It's just so corny. Reminds me of when I was depressed and actually purchased an Esther Hicks book.
So you view self development as kind of brownian motion and not a gradient descent?
the only theory of objective self-development i might subscribe to is that of increasing optionality; if a person gains more options to behave in certain ways s/he wants, that is objective self-development.
it means no change to the internal value system of the person, but a substantial increase in the means by which objects and situations of value can be pursued.
Are you saying you want things, machines, parts to compensate for you inabilities?
Or you want an increase of options and possibility at your disposal? If so, what you're describing seems to be intelligence.
And which information element within socionics clearly defines intelligence, wisdom or knowledge and therefore should be focused on for development? How would you develop this information element and gain an increase in intelligence, wisdom or knowledge?
I don't really understand the question. Are you trying to get me to say :Ne:? Or some other IE? Is there a right answer?
That article say that maximizing future entropy, future possible states of a system, the options and possibilities at one's disposal, leads to the spontaneous emergence of intelligence and intelligent behaviour.
?
no to both questions. i was not expressing a wish relating to my own needs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tropski Bolest
intelligence would be to not cite wordy pop-science articles to state the obvious.
No, because all of these questions are the wrong questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tropski Bolest
Intelligence, wisdom and knowledge are gained simply through experiencing the world, the quantity an quality of this increases with experience. They are all in part information.
Socionics deals with information metabolism, therefore not the quantity or quality of information.
The information elements in reality are simplifications of the psyche and the psyche is more complex. You cannot say 'I worked Fi, my Fi is better'. You can gain experience which helps you in life but it will have some or no impact on the information metabolism within the psyche depending on what that information is.
I apologize, I must have misinterpreted you then.Quote:
Originally Posted by labtard
From what I understand you say objective self improvement is, if there were to be such a thing, increasing optionality; if a person gains more options. I interpreted this as saying self improvement is increasing one's abilities, knowledge, work capable machines and so on, in general things that increase one's reach and impact in the real world?
Based on your responses are you saying socionics cannot aid in self improvement other then by accident and sticking to it may even be counterproductive and harmful? Or something like that?Quote:
Originally Posted by InvisibleJim
Short answer, increase your experiences and understandings.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonkopa
For example, for developing sensing, increase your amount of physically oriented pursuits. I'm not talking exercise, I am talking working with concrete physical objects. Pay attention to the items you are using, how they do what they do, how they interact with each other, etc. Add in some research about a particular activity, either through internet, youtube, library, or better yet someone who actively does that activity regularly. This way you will come to develop some rules and norms for that particular activity. (Increases the 1D experience to 2D rules/norms.) Continue by adding in new activities related to the previous activities. As you gain further awareness and understanding of the rules/norms in a variety of situations/activities, you'll start seeing how you can step away from the rules/norms, and/or recognize when the rules can be broken, and why they were broken in that particular situation. (Increases 2D rules/norms to 3D situational.) Add in more and more situations, and/or take the activities back to when primitive man would have been doing them with primitive tools, and gradually experience step by step and learn why the modifications occurred, how those modifications helped, and what new problems those modifications created, and how the activity was further modified to overcome or adapt to those changes. Also, look for external influences each step of the way. But don't expect a clear "I now have 4D Sx" kind of thing, because it is still an ever growing process.
The problem with this is that you'll be spending so much time and energy working on the new stuff that you'll be at risk of lagging behind on what you already have brain pathways for.
So, back to the short answer: increase your experiences. This will allow you to use your current and natural methods, while gradually gaining different experiences from which to draw from.
New experiences also provides other knowledge from which to draw from as needed, and increases your options/choices for related situations/contexts.
I don't think socionics can make much difference to self development. It categorises and it an 8 dimensionality of information metabolism. Self development has a number of dimensions which are focused on the information rather than the metabolism which are all unique to each individual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tropski Bolest
Playing with socionics to impact individual development seems like pushing a string to move a house.
Intuition - I don't think you really need that. For intuition creatives, N functions are basically their purpose in life, thus if your typing is correct, any activity will be naturally imprinted by your Ni creative.
For Se, well, I don't fully subscribe to the theory that you can truly "develop" your functions without distorting your personality (excepting temperament rings). For a LIE, a lot of what may look like Se would be just a version of Te or Fe.
I think you're interpreting something that isn't there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
I'm saying that socionics isn't key to understanding oneself or one's motivations. You may understand yourself using any number of platforms, but the richness of "the self" remains. Introspection is a function of any sane mind. How could you even believe in socionics without believing in a faculty for introspection?
Phone was being a bitch. Sorry redbeard.
I'm surprised that Steve Jobs character didn't design a touch screen to effectively respond to slaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deestructor
reply to no one in particular:
- Self-improvement seems different to me than self-development.
- I don't get a clear idea of what anyone here means by either.
- I don't know how to gauge whether a self has improved or developed if I do not have some way of defining or measuring the self to begin with.
- I wouldn't particularly trust anyone's measurement of a self (including my own).
- I also wouldn't trust anyone to be able to fully account for the potential (or lack thereof) of socionics to aid an individual in self-development or self-improvement. Some things are discernible and can be remarked upon, and I sense that much is not and can't. I don't know that this shouldn't keep us from trying.
reply to OP:
Hiya :wave:
Are you still with us? I have wondered about your question too. Could you say more about what you mean by develop your intuition and sensing?
In other words, you don't know what you're talking about. You could always consult the dictionary/google to define these terms, I mean, they've already been defined already. I see a lot of I don't know's in your post and that means you haven't a clue which leads to your point about the potential/or lack of socionics.... it's not just that you shouldn't trust others, you shouldn't trust yourself in your present mindset.Quote:
Originally Posted by rahmyn
OoooooooK. Thanks for the advice. ::checks self into mental hospital because unable to use dictionary::Quote:
Originally Posted by Words
With an attitude like that, you are perfect for here, lol. Enjoy your stay, you just did check in and signed the consent form, hehe.Quote:
Originally Posted by rahmyn
I don't disagree with this point as people's individual circumstances shape a lot of how they view the world and what they want out of it despite being ABLE to do the things they do, which is explained by Socionics. That ABILITY IS WHAT SOCIONICS TRIES TO EXPLAIN.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBeard
None of those platforms explain what the person is able to do. And, cynics of Socionics expect too much from it and for whatever circumstances they don't get it, they turn around and blame Socionics for not having provided that ideal circumstance for them. If they are, however, careful, patient and considerate of the world around them, of people and relationships, I don't doubt that they can find that eventually.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBeard
I'm sharing a personal story that may help people understand what it means to be yourself and/or, it this is how you look at it, self develop.
Before knowing Socionics, my typical self was as Jung described shrieked away from objects, at the intensity of them, hence needed people and things to approach me smoothly, gently; I was passionate about my moral beliefs and how I judged the way others viewed things and their expression of things (I came to correct people's beliefs and adjust them according to how I saw them), so I was very much "I believe" "You should" "It would be right if x." Can you imagine how much energy one spends regulating thoughts for others when you are being at the center of life's experience? Too much. You begin to feel resentful, alone, because really no one else feels like they are like you and truly most people are not. They are just experiencing those things that provide them with pleasurable experiences. I didn't understand those differences about myself. I never evaluated my self in terms of my way of thinking being fair or not, they were "me." So, here comes Socionics saying "you are a judging rational type, who conveys feelings of love (as you feel them), morality, etc. and there is Joe and he sees life a bit differently from you." You begin to think, wow, I was never out to see Joe as he is, but to make an impression of myself on him. Joe has been himself all along, living the world around him in his constructed universe. So, I lax my moral judgement as I begin to the see the world more objectively, as I begin to see other people's feelings more objectively and from there, I relax, I begin to not be on moral expressiveness. How have I developed my own function when really I've done the opposite service to it? I've recognized when it wants to work and on what it does. I recognize the moments when it wants to be a passionate conspirer and what that will cost me in my relationships with people, the universe of ideas and possibilities beyond who I am and the impact that I want to make. I become less "I" focused.
Before Socionics, I did not recognize the objects or people that came at me intensely, I needed more of this idea of "protection." I've seen EII who hide under the arms of people who they see as strong willed, shrieking away from others without any reasonable cause, as though they are the disagreeable infant child who needs to be in their mother's/father's arm at all time lest they should run away and abandon them. I see these EII now and their behavior and I think, "how much more would you love life and enjoy it had you been able to recognize your self, what you do and how you act."
Typically, what would happen for these scary cat EII would be is that a dual would show up and they would be the supporter role in the relationship as their dual recognized aspects about the EII and through verbal conveying of these aspects, tell the EII who they are and what they do, at which point, the EII begins to recognize themselves and their actions. With Socionics, they can do this sooner, whether that's a good thing or not, I'm not very sure, time will tell. But I look at the pictures of myself as a child, the one my dual cousin took me to get taken and I see the EII look of "shriek away from foreign people and objects" and I think, how much more comfortable and happy would this child have been had she let go of nature's clasp around her brain and just smiled for the camera, just once. So now that I see those pictures of me and recognize why I didn't like the external world, I let go, I'm able to not judge it or not hold myself at guard until I've come to a judgement, but to just enjoy it. This makes me a less stressed person, much softer and makes others want to behold me, to cherish me, as I have observed.
If an activity partner shows up before a dual, the EII feels a strong sense of their right to be a moral judge even more intensely then if a dual comes along and cools their need to judge, which sometimes, to others seems more like a control rather than a judgement; it looks like control because the person's self made moral constructs seeks to improve the world around them, according to their vision or idea and the EII, if accepted in activity of their Fi will just continue more strongly, but if some of this is absorbed and processed it's let go of and the EII is more relaxed.
I see how I change when I'm with a dual as opposed to an activity relationship; I see myself getting more vocal and passionate with an activity, and more accepting and generous when I'm with my dual.
maritsa... seriously, and respectfully, seek therapy
How is what you are describing not more fitting for an ESI type:Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=ESI
ESIs tend to evaluate people's ethical behavior "as it is" and not "as it could be" or "as it could be interpreted according to the context or another person's point of view". That means that they can be perceived as unrelentingly harsh, even unforgiving or vindictive, when correcting, punishing or even avenging what they see as unethical behavior
I'm not vengeful, vindictive, I see the positive attributes to people and focus on helping the person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shayley
Have edited a sentence from previous post to make the question clearer:Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
How is what you are describing not more fitting for an ESI type:
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=ESI
ESIs tend to evaluate people's ethical behavior "as it is" and not "as it could be" or "as it could be interpreted according to the context or another person's point of view".
I already said "you should" is a suggestion of moral right way to be, which is what I say, not "You must."Quote:
Originally Posted by Shayley
This amounts to the same thing does it not? Saying you should and saying you must has equal force, the person decided anyway, however wether it is should or must, you will still judge them based on your own arbitrary distinction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
I had a similar reaction when I first read what she wrote. To me they feel like someone telling me what to do. But...Quote:
Originally Posted by Words
http://english.stackexchange.com/que...onable-command
Must, on the other hand implies more conviction and determination. It also excludes other possibilities. And that a certain course of action is required, not just preferred.Quote:
The word should is used to indicate that among several possibilities one is recommended as particularly suitable, without mentioning or excluding others; or that a certain course of action is preferred but not necessarily required; or that (in the negative form) a certain course of action is deprecated but not prohibited (should equals is recommended that).
Now, with that said, many people use "should" when they really mean "must". One way of checking that is to see what kind of consequences follow when you say no to someone who tells you what you should do. How do they respond to you telling them no, or otherwise refusing their "suggestion"?
(Kind of like when a parent 'asks' a child "would you get that for me?" If the child doesn't, does the parent further insist or punish the child? If yes, it wasn't a question, it was a command couched as a question. ime, similar often happens with "should".)
Edited to add: but I totally agree with the last part of what you wrote.
It could be argued that psychological preferences are abilities in themselves. Is this what you are arguing? Or are you arguing that psychological preferences directly dictate practical abilities to do things removed from the psyche? If you are arguing the former, than I agree with you. If you are arguing the latter, I would disagreeQuote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
I think that once again, you are rushing to conclusions. What platforms do you think I'm referring to? By creating this strawman, you've exposed yourself as being very biased in favor of the idea that socionics is the only "way". You explicitly made this clear, not only in writing but in action.Quote:
None of those platforms explain what the person is able to do. And, cynics of Socionics expect too much from it and for whatever circumstances they don't get it, they turn around and blame Socionics for not having provided that ideal circumstance for them. If they are, however, careful, patient and considerate of the world around them, of people and relationships, I don't doubt that they can find that eventually.
Do you think that if someone enjoys different things, they will arrive at different conclusions about what is "moral", "ethical", and "true"? I don't think that's a necessity. I think all roads lead to the same destination.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
Types theory may be useful in self development by development of _weak_ functions. This should be done through weak _valued_ functions only.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonkopa
How: use that functions.
LIE may do sport needing stamina and strength. And something for Fi like noticing your feelings to people, including traits of IR, understanding what to be some other man.