to Fi polrs:

i'm curious about something. not sure how to phrase it.
i think its obvious pretty much everyone cares about having close friends and not wanting to be backstabbed and things like that. i'm just wondering how exactly that plays out in the case of Fi polrs.

1. is that sort of information processed with Ti instead? a different fx?
2. do you just not think about or care whether people you know are loyal or how much you care about them or whatever..? or do you think about it in a paranoid sort of way, or...?
3. do you feel an obligation or inclination to be a good friend or a "good person"? for what reason?

I am not sure what "polrs" is. Can you link me to something, please? Then I can see how I relate it.

Edit: I value loyalty and I feel no obligation to be a good friend. Just want to say that without knowing the polrs thing.

Edit: Being a good friend/person comes from the heart. I can't fake it and obligation...all based on morality dictated by outside influences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

I am not sure what "polrs" is. Can you link me to something, please? Then I can see how I relate it.

---

SLE and ILE have Fi polr so if you are IEI it would a characteristic of your "dual." this is a wikisocion description:

The individual does not normally pay attention to the nuances of interpersonal relationships; he is either overly suspicious or overly assuming of his relations with others when they are not clearly defined. More importance is given to these relations as they pertain to objective mutual benefit; entertaining one another and accomplishing mutual goals are seen as the main focus, rather than seeing the relationships as rewarding in and of themselves. The individual does not expect others to be actively aware or concerned with his own personal sentiments, and so sees little reason to be concerned with those of others, unless they have direct consequences for the individual. Statements by other persons reflecting their inner feelings are not fully registered by the individual if not accompanied by external emotional expression or actions. Suggestions that the individual may have acted unethically in the eyes of another person who has not clearly expressed disapproval are met with bafflement by the individual; those that are expressed without tact are either dismissed or reacted to aggressively.

Expressions of deep personal sentiments are awkward for the individual, whether coming from another or himself. He does not see it as his "right" to place the burden of his true emotions on another, both because he knows how uncomfortable those of others make him (even when they are positive and genuine), and because of his own awkwardness in expressing them.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...overted_ethics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

The individual does not expect others to be actively aware or concerned with his own personal sentiments, and so sees little reason to be concerned with those of others, unless they have direct consequences for the individual.

---

this is reading to me as: "they don't care about other peoples feelings" :lol:

what do you guys make of it?

edit: this probably sounds judgey but i just wanna hear it from the horses mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

i'm curious about something. not sure how to phrase it.
i think its obvious pretty much everyone cares about having close friends and not wanting to be backstabbed and things like that. i'm just wondering how exactly that plays out in the case of Fi polrs.

---

I think it's kinda binary. ehm i think @andelise talked about levels of control. To me people are either strangers (not to be trusted) or friends/family/lovedones. People in the first catagory kinda don't enter into any equation. I don't consciously think about how I affect them (ofc i keep up the appearances of civil behaviour, but i'll not go out of my way to help or hinder them).
People in the second catagory gain my attention, trust and love in one package. Yes there's grades of love and trust, but it's basically on or off in the sense that i'll trust my least close friend with almost as much as my closest lovedones. Not to say i value them equally, it's just, they're in that catagory..err

Betrayal means; I'll go out of my way to get to you for the first few days, afterwards i'll sever all ties and forget about you (quite literally).

Quote:

---

1. is that sort of information processed with Ti instead? a different fx?
2. do you just not think about or care whether people you know are loyal or how much you care about them or whatever..? or do you think about it in a paranoid sort of way, or...?
3. do you feel an obligation or inclination to be a good friend or a "good person"? for what reason?

---

1 no it's still Fi, it's just really really bad and binary. I do analyse relationships with Ti as a kind of security blanket though, before someone gos from acquantances to friends there's a mental checkup. not that it really helps or matters, cuz when i like someone i'll like them regardless of what my awesome Ti has to say about it...

2 eeeehh, we care, we care a lot. I think it's actually the biggest fear of an ILE to lose lovedones (not sure, @hkkmr?). I wouldn't say paranoid, but it's not nuanced. It's not "fair" or "correct". It's crude and harsh. I'm very sceptical of loyalty consciously, but i'll asume someone is trustworthy unless they betray me (that is, if I know their name -> they're in the friend zone (not that one)) Actually the assumption that people will be fair leads to being led down wich leads to even harsher conscious judgment about loyalty which, sadly, does not lead to making better choices in people which lead to.............bah

3 Yes basically I still operate under the moral restrains of my upbringing. I don't asume them to be anything more than that though (training, schooling, conditioning) and don't resist changing moral opinions if good (rational) arguments are posed or if attractive females offer me sex in return (this looks like a joke, but actually SO have a strong effect on my morals, usually pronouncing them, cuz i'm kinda amoral on my own). I want to be a good friend, good partner, good son sure... Not so sure what that means though, so i take it on a day to day, moment to moment basis. It's not categorial but kinda.... ok, lets phrase it in this way, there is a pleasing side to ILE (or at least to me) that exists because he wants to be "good". Missing the objective guideline for "good" means turning to others for that direction. Hence: I feel "good" when I'm important, good, healthy, supportive, inspiring etc to others. Is this the same as morality, nah is the end result the same, in my case probably usually.

Does this help at all? ((also, the other thing, want to pm about it?))

Wait, this says it all, and much better than I did ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

SLE and ILE have Fi polr so if you are IEI it would a characteristic of your "dual." this is a wikisocion description:

The individual does not normally pay attention to the nuances of interpersonal relationships; he is either overly suspicious or overly assuming of his relations with others when they are not clearly defined. More importance is given to these relations as they pertain to objective mutual benefit; entertaining one another and accomplishing mutual goals are seen as the main focus, rather than seeing the relationships as rewarding in and of themselves. The individual does not expect others to be actively aware or concerned with his own personal sentiments, and so sees little reason to be concerned with those of others, unless they have direct consequences for the individual. Statements by other persons reflecting their inner feelings are not fully registered by the individual if not accompanied by external emotional expression or actions. Suggestions that the individual may have acted unethically in the eyes of another person who has not clearly expressed disapproval are met with bafflement by the individual; those that are expressed without tact are either dismissed or reacted to aggressively.

Expressions of deep personal sentiments are awkward for the individual, whether coming from another or himself. He does not see it as his "right" to place the burden of his true emotions on another, both because he knows how uncomfortable those of others make him (even when they are positive and genuine), and because of his own awkwardness in expressing them.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...overted_ethics

---

why dontcha drag ankh & aq & hkkmr in here. edit: oh yeah I forgot about refi up there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

Edit: Being a good friend/person comes from the heart. I can't fake it and obligation...all based on morality dictated by outside influences.

---

a sense of obligation can come from inside, too.

i am ambivalent. loyalty is meaningless if it only comes from obligation and not from the heart, BUT..
i don't know how to hold it as a value without also holding it as a standard?

With strangers? yes that's accurate. With people I know, not at all..

As an example, i tend to walk through crowded streets in the assumption that people will move away (they do). [no regard for the sentiments of strangers]
when i walk the street with someone else, i'll make a path for them, block others that seem to be in a collision course, check how fast they're walking and if i maybe should slow down. Check if they've eaten enough and or are getting tired, check if everyone is still around...etc etc [concern for close ones]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

this is reading to me as: "they don't care about other peoples feelings" :lol:

what do you guys make of it?

edit: this probably sounds judgey but i just wanna hear it from the horses mouth.

---

That is good info! @lungs. I have to read it a couple times I think to get it.

If I am IEI you are my benefactor? Hmm, I got to look this up. heh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ath

why dontcha drag ankh & hkkmr in here. edit: oh yeah I forgot about refi up there

---

how could you, forget about me? you're just not taking my feelings into account, you dirty ILE!!

Edit: Ananka retired didn't she?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

a sense of obligation can come from inside, too.

i am ambivalent. loyalty is meaningless if it only comes from obligation and not from the heart, BUT..
i don't know how to hold it as a value without also holding it as a standard?

---

I see where it can come from the inside too but for me personally I feel morality in general is learned, from others. If I was raised by wolves (I wish) I would have no sense of morality. I would be a feral child.

Ime Fi polr does not go by a fixed set of "things to do" in order to maintain a relationship ---almost as if they don´t have a concept of what manifestation / experience of certain feelings should be like. They are more empirical, go by trial and error in relationships. As EP temp. they prefer change and will take action towards it (otherwise they get bored). As Ti-valuing EPs their focus is not mainly on "novelty" in an arena of interpersonal feelings, as one would expect from a IEE, for instance, they´re not after "nuances" they already have a glimpse of, in a way, they don´t want to enrich the "emotional palette" through new experiences, but tend to rather objectify things and persons involved - what´s played with is Ti as "objective distance" or hierarchical structures *as they perceive them*. Fe HA and Fi polr often takes the form of going mostly by obvious reactions to know what another is about, what they ´re feeling or what a relationship is made of - and thus trying to provoke those reactions. This may manifest as provoking conflicts and fights, among other things.

This has just crossed my mind , I´ve always considered it an expression of Beta Fi polr and a song about a Victim-Aggressor-like interaction : http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkj...-rihanna_music

For some more theoretical info about the POLR , in general , I also recommend this page , cause I find it pretty good on the whole : http://en.socionics.ru/index.php?opt...251&Itemid=139
(one may also find there some reasons why Fi polr may manifest as an intensive preoccupation with that particular aspect of life ...although one is not "gifted" in it ; this may result in behavior that looks like paranoia , precisely because the person doesn´t have personal frames to estimate "Fi stuff", so they try to apply Ti categorizations where it may not work)

As usual, I will answer how these apply to me and avoid arguing about type relatedness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

1. is that sort of information processed with Ti instead? a different fx?

---

I might not understand this. I think my position with relationships is less emotionally intuitive and more "contractual." I'm afraid of overstepping on someone else's boundaries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

2. do you just not think about or care whether people you know are loyal or how much you care about them or whatever..? or do you think about it in a paranoid sort of way, or...?

---

In short: Both. Sometimes I really like the idea of what Mr Ordell said about Melanie in Jackie Brown: "I don't trust Melanie but I trust Melanie to be Melanie". This basically means that if I know how a person operates and I am still aware that the worst that person would be inclined to do is within my tolerance, I can provide this person my trust at given levels.

It's also important for me to be able to retaliate so that it will work as a deterrent. By extension, I think this is the reason why martial arts tend to raise people's self-esteem more than other hobbies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

3. do you feel an obligation or inclination to be a good friend or a "good person"? for what reason?

---

I'll caricaturize my stance a bit: Being good is a good policy. It's effective to be reliable. The counterpart of reliability is influence.

ask woof, he is ILE (he mistakenly thinks he's SEE)

one thing I've noticed about Fi-PoLRs is they get mad or uncomfortable if you talk about "who they are [inside]" or "what their 'essence' is"

For me (assuming I am one), it feels like you're navigating relationships with blinders on.

It's binary. You're either all in, or all out. Small bumps are magnified to feel like catastrophic relationship enders. Friendliness from someone can feel like riding a wave outside of your control.

Unless the consequences don't matter (ie. the person is as bad at relationships as you are, you'll never see them again, etc.), new acquaintanceships can be unpleasant because of the fear of transgressing on someone's values. Meeting new people feels like worlds colliding.


There's a sort of unintentional lethargy when it comes to building relationships - or sharp spikes of relationship-building activity. As was said, it's binary.


And to people who say that Fi Polrs need constant "feedback" because they're inept at reading signals, which is why they have duals who LOLOLOL or :(:(:( all the time: go away! We're not that bad at reading people's intentions. (even though it'd be fun to have a dual like that).


I hope those aren't just my own idiosyncrasies. Or worse, if everyone was like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

i'm curious about something. not sure how to phrase it.
i think its obvious pretty much everyone cares about having close friends and not wanting to be backstabbed and things like that. i'm just wondering how exactly that plays out in the case of Fi polrs.

---

Well people seem to think I'm Fi Polr so I'll answer.

Quote:

---

1. is that sort of information processed with Ti instead? a different fx?

---

I have no idea really.

Quote:

---

2. do you just not think about or care whether people you know are loyal or how much you care about them or whatever..? or do you think about it in a paranoid sort of way, or...?

---

No. Paranoid maybe. It's more a coarse kind of way, within certain boundaries.

Quote:

---

3. do you feel an obligation or inclination to be a good friend or a "good person"? for what reason?

---

Sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenneth Chesney

one thing I've noticed about Fi-PoLRs is they get mad or uncomfortable if you talk about "who they are [inside]" or "what their 'essence' is"

---

why can't this be attributed to any other NF function polr?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ath

why can't this be attributed to any other NF function polr?

---

Who doesn't get mad or uncomfortable when lunatic with raging issues authoritatively project his delusions about who you are?

model A confuses more people than it helps i think. esp when you cross it with "jungian" super-real authentic cognitive functions and the cult of ashton. anyway socionics proves time and time again that it cannot model or predict higher-level social or mental functions, and when you get into more complex stuff you don't get neat, predictable categories and there is a lot of overlap between types. the stock response would be, that in classical socionics, polr doesn't mean the IE is non-functional, it's processed the same way just less comfortably or willingly, so it's more of a repressed process, but seriously whatever. IME with Fi-polrs, it seems like they have very little insight into how people feel towards them, for instance my ILE friend in highschool dorkily told me he had read a book on body-language and according to what it said, i must be secretly in love with him. so i mean, i'm inclined to think that level of social retardedness is exclusive to Fi-polrs but i have no way of proving this. in the same vein i keep talking about LSI best friend, who isn't Fi-polr but exhibits this weird do-you-like-me-or-do-you-hate-me cycle and he randomly (random to me) becomes distant and for a while remains distant, and then opens up about how he thinks i don't like him and the distancing is so that he doesn't get hurt, but he doesn't open up this way in front of everyone and the feelings are precious, delicate parts of his inner self that must be preserved, and so forth.

anyway, i have no idea what i'm talking about i hope this babbling was sufficient to cure your boredom for a couple of seconds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ath

why dontcha drag ankh & aq & hkkmr in here. edit: oh yeah I forgot about refi up there

---

QQ

*pets fox*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerx

And to people who say that Fi Polrs need constant "feedback" because they're inept at reading signals, which is why they have duals who LOLOLOL or :(:(:( all the time: go away! We're not that bad at reading people's intentions. (even though it'd be fun to have a dual like that)..

---

Eh, it's not that I'm BAD at it, it's just that once I think I've reached a conclusion to their intentions, I second guess myself like crazy. "I think this person wants to be friends? But do they want to hang out outside of class? Get a coffee? Oh that's weird. What if we're just class-friends and not out-of-class friends. If I messaged them asking to just hang out, would they think that weird? Like I'm someone they don't mind hanging out with in class, but not fit for being friends. I mean, I have people like that.Okay, well, let's just wait and see if they say they want to do anything instead of actually doing something myself."

I am really good with groups of people, though. I think because it's a group, there aren't as many deep-emotional-inner-bond-talk or whatever, which makes me uncomfortable. If a group starts doing that, I walk away, but if it's something like a work group or school group where we have a task, I excel at getting people motivated and working together.

Also, once I trust someone, the instant they do something to change that, I have no problem immediately dropping them. I usually don't do forgive-and-forget. Once someone does something that could be even the littlest bit outside my trust for them, it's like a switch and I nope right out of there cold.

I also often get called a know-it-all because I correct people a lot and point out a lot of really cool information about how things work or something I learned. But really, it's just me treating others how I want to be treated. I love learning and I like when people point out how I'm wrong so I can adjust. However, other people have called it condescending. I just think I'm educating the world and they're better off for it, especially as my tone is more akin to excitement than condescension so they can suck a dick.

Fi polr just has to do with being uncomfortable around groups of people. They are quote well in their relations but place them in a room with people unlike NFs and SFs that are social and connect to others they are uncomfortable and stand by the sidelines and don't interact much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxOnStilts

"I think this person wants to be friends? But do they want to hang out outside of class? Get a coffee? Oh that's weird. What if we're just class-friends and not out-of-class friends. If I messaged them asking to just hang out, would they think that weird? Like I'm someone they don't mind hanging out with in class, but not fit for being friends. I mean, I have people like that.Okay, well, let's just wait and see if they say they want to do anything instead of actually doing something myself."

---

haha, yeah this pretty much encapsulates the stasis and anxiety I feel around most people. It often leads to me seeming more introverted and avoidant than I actually am. I've gotten better over time though, esp. since learning about Socionics.

Quote:

---

I also often get called a know-it-all because I correct people a lot and point out a lot of really cool information about how things work or something I learned. But really, it's just me treating others how I want to be treated. I love learning and I like when people point out how I'm wrong so I can adjust. However, other people have called it condescending. I just think I'm educating the world and they're better off for it, especially as my tone is more akin to excitement than condescension so they can suck a dick.

---

Augusta was apparently like that too.

Negativist types and introverted ST have the most trouble with relations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AshSun

This has just crossed my mind , I´ve always considered it an expression of Beta Fi polr and a song about a Victim-Aggressor-like interaction : http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkj...-rihanna_music

---

Seriously, put a flashing warning sign when you link some material, I got curious this time and it almost burned out my eyes and made me deaf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

Fi polr just has to do with being uncomfortable around groups of people. They are quote well in their relations but place them in a room with people unlike NFs and SFs that are social and connect to others they are uncomfortable and stand by the sidelines and don't interact much.

---

no, NOT AT ALL

SLE and ILE are two of the most sociable, group-oriented types in the socion

again: your head is up your ass

Gonna try to tone down the Fi polr in this thread a bit. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjvybhRUym8

I think she´s SEE btw. Incredible voice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radio

model A confuses more people than it helps i think. esp when you cross it with "jungian" super-real authentic cognitive functions and the cult of ashton. anyway socionics proves time and time again that it cannot model or predict higher-level social or mental functions, and when you get into more complex stuff you don't get neat, predictable categories and there is a lot of overlap between types. the stock response would be, that in classical socionics, polr doesn't mean the IE is non-functional, it's processed the same way just less comfortably or willingly, so it's more of a repressed process, but seriously whatever. IME with Fi-polrs, it seems like they have very little insight into how people feel towards them, for instance my ILE friend in highschool dorkily told me he had read a book on body-language and according to what it said, i must be secretly in love with him. so i mean, i'm inclined to think that level of social retardedness is exclusive to Fi-polrs but i have no way of proving this. in the same vein i keep talking about LSI best friend, who isn't Fi-polr but exhibits this weird do-you-like-me-or-do-you-hate-me cycle and he randomly (random to me) becomes distant and for a while remains distant, and then opens up about how he thinks i don't like him and the distancing is so that he doesn't get hurt, but he doesn't open up this way in front of everyone and the feelings are precious, delicate parts of his inner self that must be preserved, and so forth.

anyway, i have no idea what i'm talking about i hope this babbling was sufficient to cure your boredom for a couple of seconds

---

Great commentare, Radio. I think SLEs are really good at "reading" people but they only see the manifested surface, the expressions and so on. SLE is the estereotypical con man. Although they seem to have no friends because there are no true bonding or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jean Costa da Silva

Great commentare, Radio. I think SLEs are really good at "reading" people but they only see the manifested surface, the expressions and so on. SLE is the estereotypical con man. Although they seem to have no friends because there are no true bonding or something like that.

---

WTF? eh....Beta's bond plenty, SLE's included. Not sure what kind of SLE's you know, but imh this is way off....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxOnStilts

Also, once I trust someone, the instant they do something to change that, I have no problem immediately dropping them. I usually don't do forgive-and-forget. Once someone does something that could be even the littlest bit outside my trust for them, it's like a switch and I nope right out of there cold.

---

I'm also like that. I believe all the ExTx types are similar in this respect. (and acting differently is something we very slowly learn from our duals)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reficulris

WTF? eh....Beta's bond plenty, SLE's included. Not sure what kind of SLE's you know, but imh this is way off....

---

What is Fi? Is recognizing oneself identity and the identity of others. So if you're a Fi POLR you might have some dificulties on facing a more closed contact and intimacy and thinking about who you are, because that frightens you. Keeping the things superficial is better. Dificulty puting oneself in other people place. But whatever that's my opinion. I'm a newbie and i'm sleepy. I love SLEs btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jean Costa da Silva

What is Fi? Is recognizing oneself identity and the identity of others. So if you're a Fi POLR you might have some dificulties on facing a more closed contact and intimacy and thinking about who you are, because that frightens you. Keeping the things superficial is better. Dificulty puting oneself in other people place. But whatever that's my opinion. I'm a newbie and i'm sleepy. I love SLEs btw.

---

Hmp, If Fi is what you define it as, maybe. (but that definition is far too shallow, narrow and unecompassing for one element)

But than, Fi Polr doesn't mean you have NO Fi, it's just pretty stupid. I think SLE's might actually be more in danger of bonding with the wrong people than they are of not bonding. Beta is a pretty closely knit quadra, it's bonded, it's passionate.

keeping things superficial is NOT beta at all. (i usually point at the gamma's for that, but than, i'm superficial, so alpha's can be too (so probably NTR)).

I'm not sure your response isn't "just theory" and no meat...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenneth Chesney

no, NOT AT ALL

SLE and ILE are two of the most sociable, group-oriented types in the socion

again: your head is up your ass

---

I agree totally with KeChey here.
@Maritsa, you're probably as far off as you could be...... what you describe might be Fe polr. Definately not FI polr.

I think a lot of ILE's have given good explanations about how this manifests in them above. Unless you're un/re-typing them all as something else (and even than, what ARE they describing?) your explanation is kinda like translating something 20 times through babblefish.

Also, why are you posting in a thread that calls for Fi polrs to respond?

Regarding Kenneth's retyping of Maritsa as IEI... @Maritsa, have you considered Ti-HA for yourself? It would certainly explain your easily criticized views, such as in this topic.

@lungs

im not fi polr (I don't think lol) but I want to answer on behalf of my entp friend:

He does nice things for people because well I think at the core he's just a good guy (like a lot of heroes say, you don't need a reason for helping people, you just help them because it's the right thing to do), just like a stereotypical caring gamer dude (he's one of my closest friends). However, for him being Fi polr is more about being crippled romantically I think. He admits that he's so clueless in that area, like sharing romantic intimacy. But yet somehow I feel safe with him and trust him, it's weird. He's pretty narcissistic in the sense he knows so much about everything, yet he has this softness/optimist about him.

In a lot of ways I think he's nicer than me and I envy that about him, he goes out of his way to drive people places when they can't. I sometimes wish I was more giving like that, we are strong in different areas tho. I feel much more confident about romance than he does. He feels a lot more confident with extroverted/logical-y stuff. yet at the core we care about not pissing each other off, so it works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esaman

Who doesn't get mad or uncomfortable when lunatic with raging issues authoritatively project his delusions about who you are?

---

You mad bro? Why should you get mad, what, are you afraid of the truth or something? I could personally care less what someone thinks about who I am.

As far as being back stabbed is concerned, no, I honestly don't think about it nor do I feel I've been betrayed in almost any sense of the word. I don't really think of my friends as either 'with me or against me' or anyone for that matter, even a significant other. Conceptually my thought pattern doesn't involve 'sides' and to that end people 'switching sides' doesn't register. I generally trust people to act as individuals with their own interests first and if I really trust someone their actions don't bother me.

EDIT: Sometimes my friends want to succeed at my expense, that doesn't make them not my friends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erk

I could personally care less what someone thinks about who I am.

---

I couldn't care less what someone thinks about who I am.
I could care less what somemany think about who I am, but I wouldn't because it is bad for social life.
It so happens that people are easily impressionable even against their best judgment and conscious will. Projections of loud lunatic can and will land in their subconscious.
As so it is rational, even though usually just instinctual reaction to want the person to shut up.

 

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erk

You mad bro? Why should you get mad, what, are you afraid of the truth or something?

---

Don't mind the truth, but cognitive dissonance causes one to come to have distaste for misinformation and confusion it causes. I am sure you have heard about such experience.
Any other questions, my brother by hominid family?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerx

For me (assuming I am one), it feels like you're navigating relationships with blinders on.

It's binary. You're either all in, or all out. Small bumps are magnified to feel like catastrophic relationship enders. Friendliness from someone can feel like riding a wave outside of your control.

Unless the consequences don't matter (ie. the person is as bad at relationships as you are, you'll never see them again, etc.), new acquaintanceships can be unpleasant because of the fear of transgressing on someone's values. Meeting new people feels like worlds colliding.


There's a sort of unintentional lethargy when it comes to building relationships - or sharp spikes of relationship-building activity. As was said, it's binary.


And to people who say that Fi Polrs need constant "feedback" because they're inept at reading signals, which is why they have duals who LOLOLOL or :(:(:( all the time: go away! We're not that bad at reading people's intentions. (even though it'd be fun to have a dual like that).


I hope those aren't just my own idiosyncrasies. Or worse, if everyone was like that.

---

^ Just wanted to add something to this. If this is functionics 101 to you, then sorry:

Feelings of helplessness aren't specific to Polrs. All weak functions create these feelings. The difference between dual-seeking and Polr is that the latter exhibits an insecurity which stems from feeling personally obligated to act in a way that you're incompetent in, the fear of being exposed as a fraud, etc.


Criticism to the Polr is a blow to how you think others perceive you. Even casually mentioning a situation with no hint of offense having taken place can trigger a paranoid reaction.

Exposing the Polr is an easy pain to inflict because of the target's hyper-paranoia and lack of confidence. Your Polr-incompetence is something you try to hide. Some go to elaborate lengths to compensate for their weakness.


Ideally, in-quadra interactions should mitigate most of the above effects because of the assured attitude of indifference to the Polr function by your quadra mates. You can feel relaxed in not having to use it.


I'm still not sure what happens when more "assertive" people choose to flaunt their Polrs. Do they still feel an undercurrent of the above-mentioned insecurities?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reficulris

I think SLE's might actually be more in danger of bonding with the wrong people than they are of not bonding. Beta is a pretty closely knit quadra, it's bonded, it's passionate.

keeping things superficial is NOT beta at all.

---

Yes to SLEs making (occasionally) poor judgments about who to bond with… Touchy subject if it's a current friend or past relationship that hits home… Even if you're trusted not to beat it into the ground, it's disrespect at worst/uselessly critical at best. (Watch how quickly the conversation shifts topic, or into a justification.) Someone who's been written off - that's a different reaction. Bring up a psycho ex and it's good for a laugh, but if you've got a psycho ex, he/she may be thrown back at you in the same spirit.

Also agree about betas - the ones who want to get to know each other, anyway - push past 'superficial' quickly… A wise beta once said: "if there's someone you want to know, the best way to get to know them is by sleeping with them." (Actually, that might've been me who said it… Your mileage may vary :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerx

I'm still not sure what happens when more "assertive" people choose to flaunt their Polrs. Do they still feel an undercurrent of the above-mentioned insecurities?

---

The answer's not the kinda thing you'd want to get out on the internet… :) (And by "you" I mean... not me.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JWC3

EDIT: Sometimes my friends want to succeed at my expense, that doesn't make them not my friends.

---

Really? I don't understand how this can be possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Really? I don't understand how this can be possible.

---

Well for the most part if someone is close to me then any transgressions of theirs just sort of get dealt with at the time. I really don't hold grudges against people when they wrong me, I can't really. For instance my friend in college came home late one night and started screaming at me to do a bunch of his household chores, in that instance he offended me and even if it seems trite I felt wronged, so I tackled him into our wall.

Rather than deal with the possibility that his actions were a long term comment on our friendship, I just set the precedent that if he comes home late at night and starts screaming at me, I tackle him. The next day, he and I were chummy as ever, because why wouldn't we be?

Perhaps that's not quite what you're talking about though.

EDIT: What's an instance where you were betrayed? I could try and think of a similar story from my own history and we could compare.

Being impressionable is a sign of weakness. It's not the lunatics fault you have no sense of self. Stop blaming others for your own problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JWC3

EDIT: What's an instance where you were betrayed? I could try and think of a similar story from my own history and we could compare.

---

It didn't (and doesn't) happen that frequently, mostly because I learnt to avoid situations where it may happen. The fist that comes to mind is the following: I was taking part in an (amateur) race with a friend. A fairly challenging race: 230 kms in the mountains. During the first part of the race, he was having some trouble and I kept on waiting him and placing myself right before him to "cut the wind" so to speak. At a certain point during the final stages, I was the one having some troubles and he told me "I want to finish quickly, see you at the end". Needless to say I was fairly pissed:indifferent:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

It didn't (and doesn't) happen that frequently, mostly because I learnt to avoid situations where it may happen. The fist that comes to mind is the following: I was taking part in an (amateur) race with a friend. A fairly challenging race: 230 kms in the mountains. During the first part of the race, he was having some trouble and I kept on waiting him and placing myself right before him to "cut the wind" so to speak. At a certain point during the final stages, I was the one having some troubles and he told me "I want to finish quickly, see you at the end". Needless to say I was fairly pissed:indifferent:

---

Did you still talk? I mean I can't think of a specific sports example myself but certainly something like that has had to of happened at one point. I would likely of just called my friends out on it, they likely would joke that if I was better at sports there wouldn't be a problem, then after a day or so at most it would likely just become a funny story.

Then that's just sorta how it goes. Pretty much no matter how pissed I get over time it just becomes a funny story and if there were any initial feelings of betrayal they never last and to that end I don't remember those situations as negative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JWC3

Did you still talk? I mean I can't think of a specific sports example myself but certainly something like that has had to of happened at one point. I would likely of just called my friends out on it, they likely would joke that if I was better at sports there wouldn't be a problem, then after a day or so at most it would likely just become a funny story.

---

Yeah, he's still my friend and I do spend time with him etc. But my trust in him as gone down a notch, at least when it comes to reciprocating in potentially "difficult" situations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Yeah, he's still my friend and I do spend time with him etc. But my trust in him as gone down a notch, at least when it comes to reciprocating in potentially "difficult" situations.

---

Two notches, or one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erk

Being impressionable is a sign of weakness. It's not the lunatics fault you have no sense of self. Stop blaming others for your own problems.

---

Showing weakness is a sign of strength.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reficulris

Hmp, If Fi is what you define it as, maybe. (but that definition is far too shallow, narrow and unecompassing for one element)

But than, Fi Polr doesn't mean you have NO Fi, it's just pretty stupid. I think SLE's might actually be more in danger of bonding with the wrong people than they are of not bonding. Beta is a pretty closely knit quadra, it's bonded, it's passionate.

keeping things superficial is NOT beta at all. (i usually point at the gamma's for that, but than, i'm superficial, so alpha's can be too (so probably NTR)).

I'm not sure your response isn't "just theory" and no meat...

---

I don't even know if I'm SLE, or not, but I really can't be bothered bonding with the wrong people. It sounds like a waste of time that won't go anywhere at all.

But hell I'm talking to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mercutio

Two notches, or one?

---

One, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

One, I guess.

---

So it'd mild, and you wouldn't bring it up normally, other than somewhere relevant like this.

Sometimes it's hard not to hold things against people. But it's not always in proportion to the event.

Like it's a kind of double up - that they'd do that, and that they did it.

@FDG That's completely fair. I do stuff like that all the time. You count that as betrayal? To say you're not going to be breaking wind for this guy anytime soon, but getting a beer together is fine, makes it seem... Not that bad, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mercutio

I don't even know if I'm SLE, or not, but I really can't be bothered bonding with the wrong people. It sounds like a waste of time that won't go anywhere at all.

But hell I'm talking to you.

---

Talking =/= bonding, you should be safe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

It didn't (and doesn't) happen that frequently, mostly because I learnt to avoid situations where it may happen. The fist that comes to mind is the following: I was taking part in an (amateur) race with a friend. A fairly challenging race: 230 kms in the mountains. During the first part of the race, he was having some trouble and I kept on waiting him and placing myself right before him to "cut the wind" so to speak. At a certain point during the final stages, I was the one having some troubles and he told me "I want to finish quickly, see you at the end". Needless to say I was fairly pissed:indifferent:

---

Yeah, something like that would bother me only initially and would probably make me less likely to help him again if the situation ever came up again (although helping people gives me kinda some sense of satisfaction, so I might still do it for my own sake).

For me betrayal would need to be fairly "bad" for me to actively cut someone out of my life. Once a friend slept with someone I was involved with, that was the end of the friendship. Also, active undercutting of my goals has been a reason to drop someone in the past. Finally, I kinda suffer people who talk behind my back fairly badly, one occasion isn't enough to sever bonds but if it's a theme i'll get them out of my social environment.

Interesting enough, borrowing money and never repaying it is not betreyal to me, i think most of my friends owe me large sums of money if i'd bother to keep tabs and i'm usually contributing more than others to social events. I think i'm operating under the assumption that if I ever have less money than I do now they'll take up their part of the expenses, but its not explicit and i'm not sure if it's likely either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reficulris

Interesting enough, borrowing money and never repaying it is not betreyal to me,

---

Yeah I wouldn't care about that either, don't know exactly why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reficulris

Talking =/= bonding, you should be safe.

---

http://www.truthaboutdeception.com/a...ttachment.html

:indifferent:

Test

Quote:

---

Attachment Style Results
Based on your answers, your attachment style illustrates secure tendencies.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JWC3

@FDG That's completely fair. I do stuff like that all the time. You count that as betrayal? To say you're not going to be breaking wind for this guy anytime soon, but getting a beer together is fine, makes it seem... Not that bad, really.

---

Well, I used to consider him one of my closest friends (perhaps wrongly so), and after that I didn't anymore, and I consider it "bad" from that point of view. But yes sure I don't have feelings of hatred towards him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Well, I used to consider him one of my closest friends (perhaps wrongly so), and after that I didn't anymore, and I consider it "bad" from that point of view. But yes sure I don't have feelings of hatred towards him.

---

Well in that sense I completely empathize. I guess I got caught up in the more grandiose connotations of the word.

@lungs:
i also think it shows in kinda a naief orientation towards potential partners. I usually am not aware if someone likes me (leading to "I like you" ->"lolwut?!" moments). Alternatively, when I like someone I'll go into full fledged counter factual thinking mode (see
"he's just not that into you" for great examples).

Finally i I think it shows in a distaste of moral judgements in the categorical sense. While I do have intense dislikes for certain persons I rarely categorize them as "bad".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reficulris

@lungs:
i also think it shows in kinda a naief orientation towards potential partners. I usually am not aware if someone likes me (leading to "I like you" ->"lolwut?!" moments). Alternatively, when I like someone I'll go into full fledged counter factual thinking mode (see
"he's just not that into you" for great examples).

---

i've seen this in eii descriptions, though. attributed to weak Se.

Quote:

---

Finally i I think it shows in a distaste of moral judgements in the categorical sense. While I do have intense dislikes for certain persons I rarely categorize them as "bad".

---

does it just not occur to you, or is it something you actively resist doing?
not trying to stir shit, but i'm reminded of you telling another poster that the only correct way to deal with someone here is to put them on ignore..to me, that looks like a categorical judgment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

i've seen this in eii descriptions, though. attributed to weak Se.

---

Se wouldn't be my forte either, ok, meh so i thought that might be Fi polr :(

Quote:

---

does it just not occur to you, or is it something you actively resist doing?
not trying to stir shit, but i'm reminded of you telling another poster that the only correct way to deal with someone here is to put them on ignore..to me, that looks like a categorical judgment?

---

It does not occur to me to make some kind of identity statement. So I don't go from user X has been agressive to me on the forum to user X is bad. I DO go to "I'll put him on ignore and advice others to do the same". I also feel bad for not being able to get through to them myself, but I'll tell myself that's it going to be pain so I ignore. But maybe you are right, there was something spite-like in that message, trying to make my distaste clear, so...dunno, maybe i'm more alergic to others' use of it and doing it myself hypocritically ;-)

Not sure if that's categorial. For instance, user Y might do exactly the same thing as user X but the timing is different. This time I don't ignore him and we proceed to have nice relations.

I think it's basically arbitrary, or maybe more due to instinct/feeling/luck that I categorize people into "for me" and "not for me". The second category is everyone who didn't capture my attention or alternatively, captured it in a bad way.

I can say that it shows up in my consciousness as either fear/repulsion or love/attraction whereas strangers trigger the first response until they talk to me and than i'll usually either click (put them in the loved catagory) or not click and i'll continue to avoid them.... maybe that's not too different from good/bad though, although it's certainly completely subjective and there is no logic or reason to it...

hmmm food for thought :) could be that i'm just not aware of my use of categories.


((as aside, or more elaboration on the above; I kinda see "Bad" as something that's...linked to rules, or regularities. Doing X is always bad, doing Y is always good etc etc. I have always had problems with rules in such sense and have always pointed out exceptions, reasons why rules like that were stupid (see my small outing in the religion threads, i most certainly have moral feelings about religious rules).

In that sense i'm not easily persuaded that someone is bad. However, when i meet someone I usually have a feeling or instinct about that person and i've learned to trust it. It usually filters bad people out. Not BAD as in the above, cuz i hang with a lot of sinners. but Bad people as in...not good for me, hard to explain... people who might betray me people who are not authentic in a way people who are not real...

So it's not like I'm arguing that I'm without moral taste, or without prejudice or without hate or spite, i'm not. It's just the a priori use of moral statements that gets on my nerves...))

are you bothered by retypings? more and more its harder to see you as not IEE but it could be confirmation bias ofc.

Final edit: I have seen Fi-PoLR overcompensation manifest and it looks sort of like... occasionally trying too hard and being controlling about things like values, behaviors, in situations in which it doesn't truly matter, or misreading and thinking that others' actions are a result of specific positive communications whereas they might not be rooted in these things (i.e. still using Fe-HA to read situations.)

It also kind of looks like going through all the motions of being very diplomatic but still not really knowing how you stand with others, nor knowing how to react to others' positive reactions to your behavior. So basically, like solving the Fi-PoLR on a "surface" level but still not managing to make deeper connections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

It didn't (and doesn't) happen that frequently, mostly because I learnt to avoid situations where it may happen. The fist that comes to mind is the following: I was taking part in an (amateur) race with a friend. A fairly challenging race: 230 kms in the mountains. During the first part of the race, he was having some trouble and I kept on waiting him and placing myself right before him to "cut the wind" so to speak. At a certain point during the final stages, I was the one having some troubles and he told me "I want to finish quickly, see you at the end". Needless to say I was fairly pissed:indifferent:

---

LOL such an asshole. Even most Pros are more sportsmanlike during competition than your "friend"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

Fi polr just has to do with being uncomfortable around groups of people. They are quote well in their relations but place them in a room with people unlike NFs and SFs that are social and connect to others they are uncomfortable and stand by the sidelines and don't interact much.

---

This is so true I see it in SLEs I know...It's cool about them because I feel that way too sometimes so it's like we have something in common. When this happens, we both give each other knowing looks that say "get me out of here".

I was friends with an SLE for years, and I noticed that although she loved being the center of attention, many times she felt awkward when meeting new people. Yet I was the only one who realized it because I was her friend. She was SOO insecure it was as bad as me. But she covered it up with her fake niceness and engaging them in conversation. I never had as much patience to talk for as long as she did

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

I believe the desire/need to have friends is pretty universal/human, and not necessarily type-related. I don't see that as being necessarily related to Fi. I view Fi as having better ability to perceive and gauge subjective feelings of like/dislike, not necessarily to be inclined to want more friends.

#1 - In Fi-POLR, and in the case of any type, people would likely perceive friendship through their Ego functions: an ILE may view someone as a friend if they open-mindedly allow more exploration of thought, or an SLE may view a friend if they do what the SLE says or follows/supports the SLE's agenda rather than opposing it. In this sense, friends are generally made with like-minded people.

More specifically, to answer #2, I would say SLEs care a lot about people being loyal. Their Fi-POLR is more or less manifested as their not knowing how others will feel about what they say or do. I have an SLE friend who, before giving a speech to a group, will jokingly apologize in advance if he offends anyone. He's said things in front of a group of people before like "tennis is a weak sport", not really thinking that there may be people in the audience who like tennis and might be offended by that. He was simply thinking in an Se/Ti frame of mind about how a sport is perceived from style and respect and analyzing why it wouldn't be as tough or require as much physical energy, force, etc.

For #3, I would say most people, even Fi-POLRS, value being a good person and generally doing something to help others. I read in a book recently that only 0.5% of people are generally wackos or destructive. Heck, even in the other thread on this socionics forum, people were saying a good portion of the psychopaths, who can be up to 1% of the population, are still good people if they have been raised in a good environment. In general, we as humans have evolved to give positive value to each other's lives, otherwise we wouldn't have survived as a species. Of course there are exceptions, but for the most part people are good by nature. I view that more as a need/trait of humans as opposed to be a socionics function, or the kind of information that would be perceived.

---

well said! this should be an eye-opener to people who think being an Fi-type simply means "trying to be nice" or "caring about being a good person"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William

I believe the desire/need to have friends is pretty universal/human, and not necessarily type-related. I don't see that as being necessarily related to Fi. I view Fi as having better ability to perceive and gauge subjective feelings of like/dislike, not necessarily to be inclined to want more friends.

---

this!

although I might simplify it to say, "having better ability to perceive and gauge subjective feelings".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erk

Being impressionable is a sign of weakness.

---

No, it's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaftPunk

LOL such an asshole. Even most Pros are more sportsmanlike during competition than your "friend"

---

Yeah see, I totally agree lol. I understand it may be an exaggerated reaction but that really diminished my trust in him.

Ti valuers want "the truth" as understood by them to be strongly emotionally validated by everyone around them. Sometimes this leads to people being kind, not backstabbing them, etc. but that's not what they actually seek. They want their truth to be ascertained, one way or another. The quiet, subtle Fi valuer is like a loose thread in a scarf, a deviation. Something that can destabilize the whole structure. The more passiveness and ambiguity a Ti valuer meets in response to their logical categorizing, the more insecure they become and the more they will push for emotional clarity. This sometimes has the effect of destroying :Fi: bonds. So in general, Ti valuers don't seek to be good people or not, it's just not the way they think, but at the most they can become "evil" when they consistently meet with emotions that differ from what they logically expect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

i'm curious about something. not sure how to phrase it.
i think its obvious pretty much everyone cares about having close friends and not wanting to be backstabbed and things like that. i'm just wondering how exactly that plays out in the case of Fi polrs.

1. is that sort of information processed with Ti instead? a different fx?
2. do you just not think about or care whether people you know are loyal or how much you care about them or whatever..? or do you think about it in a paranoid sort of way, or...?
3. do you feel an obligation or inclination to be a good friend or a "good person"? for what reason?

---

ILE here, fi polr, NeTi ego.

Information like that is usually actually routed through my ego block. If I see someone upset, I will deduct through my knowledge of the person probable things that could have went wrong. It works the same way where I actually know where a conversation is going 5 words in lol. I do want a close friend, but I don't really have any, almost all are acquaintances. I have no understanding of where I sit in people's eyes at all, so I route through ego block once again and ask myself if this person is doing friend like things or showing signs of not-friendly actions. I frequently get called selfish or heartless, but I am actually very kind, I just don't know how to connect, and duals are really the only people who see this in me. I'm paranoid everyone hates me, or stands me to be polite. I really dislike Fi statements about other people in general, because I feel they are really cruel, or stereotypes. It might have to do with not really connecting with someone, so I can't comprehend how you'd know that other person so well that you can make statements like that.
I am a good person, I'm inclined to love everyone because I put emphasis on Fe, if people make up the Fe, then they must be adding to it, so they're good (Te detemining worth of individuals I guess).

Who are these people that go around calling people selfish or heartless to their face? :confused:

There's a lot that comes to mind when reading this thread, so I'll try to get it all out here.

Getting backstabbed, to me, is grounds for immediate dismissal from the "friend" category. I'm very selective as it is with who I put trust in, so betraying that is a very quick way to get the cold shoulder from me. I can think of one person who's earned their way back into my inner circle after cheating on her boyfriend (who was also a friend of mine). Only after finding out that she had already broken-up with him did I finally let it all go.

I'm absolutely horrible when it comes to meeting new people and finding something in-common to talk about. I always thought something was wrong with me and that maybe I wasn't as extroverted as I've always thought. Hearing that this might be a Fi-polar thing is actually a relief.

If someone's blatantly wrong about something, I'm usually one of the first to call them out about it - usually really bluntly. I'd rather be right than to make someone feel good.

Also, being Fi-polar doesn't mean that we're not good people, it's just that our values don't come from some soft, mushy "feeling" about things. They usually come from more concrete sources - in my case, The Bible, the law, or social norms (in that order).

Anything else?