SLE Thoughts

Most type descriptions attempt to isolate the functions (e.g., Se Base is like this, Ti creative is like that), or they rely exclusively on observable behavior traits. I'm trying to avoid both of these. Rather, I want to talk about how I think about things and perceive things, and consider how "SLE behaviors/traits" might result. Isolating functions causes stereotyping (e.g., Se in the base function is all about force), and it neglects to show the "whole" of the SLE experience. Behaviors stereotypically manifested by SLEs can happen in many TIMs so it's crucial to differentiate between the outwardly observable behavior and the motivation/processing that leads to said behavior.


What I write below isn't organized in any particular way; rather, I'm throwing down my thoughts while I'm still thinking about Socionics so that these thoughts don't disappear into the abyss. Below is the first part. Many parts will follow over the coming months because there are a lot of things I want to write about. This post is about abstract object processing and time as space. Future posts will include my thoughts about physical object/space processing, talking about feeeeeeeeeelings, aggressor romancing and some of its subtleties (yeah, you knew that one was going to happen), what it's like to walk down the street, aggressive behaviors, intertype relations, and other things that occur to me the more I analyze my thought processes. If you have thoughts, questions, or topics you'd like me to talk about, just say the word.


Let's go!


I perceive unfolding situations as space, and events/objectives of the future as discrete objects within that space. The objects' locations depend on the proximity of the event. I exist in this space too but I don't think about that too much. Things that get in the way of future events/objectives are definitely in the space too, but they're closer.

For example, say I want to get a new job; the desired event of a job offer is an object in the distance. The other things blocking it are finding a job that's a good fit for me (remember that this process/action is interpreted as an object), and going through the interview process (separate related objects include preparing for it, looking the part, physically making the interview happen, charming the interviewers, extracting important information from the interviewers, etc.). I can see all these objects in space, but only in their current positions. It's hard for me to predict how the objects will move over time; I pretty much only see snapshots of the space. You can act on objects, dodge them, or wait for them to move/appear/disappear. Some objects act how you think they do; for example, there are never difficulties in finding a way to look the part for the interview. You just go out and buy anything necessary and then the "dress" object disappears, while the other objects shift closer. That's a new snapshot.


The SLE mind wants to eliminate all the obstacle-objects by whatever means necessary in order to get to the goal-objects. Some means are very natural to the SLE, while other means are really awkward for the SLE.


Some comfortable means:
Do a job yourself if everyone else will slow things down (e.g., don't ask for permission or others' preferences);
Get someone else to do the job for you if they're willing and will do it better or more conveniently than you can at the time (e.g., tell everyone you know about your job search intentions, and some of them will volunteer to make connections for you);
Confront someone directly about something, but only if you're certain that it won't cause any relationship/emotional backlash that you're not able to ignore


Some neutral means:
Wading through bureaucracy/paperwork (I don't like this but you'll do it if you need to);
Mapping out plans (personally, I prefer to be more spontaneous with my timing because my moods vary a lot (e7 related?), but I can do this when there are a lot of things to keep track of)
Charming people directly (it's hit-or-miss, depending on the person)
Taking others' opinions into account (personally, I care a lot about specific people's opinions, but not so much about others' opinions.)


Some awkward means:
Pretty much anything involving diplomacy/people skills, although this becomes slightly less awkward with age


The issues come when the objects act differently than you expect them to, or when they move in unexpected ways. This usually happens when using the comfortable means when awkward means are called for. As you may have noticed, the awkward means include having people skills. And since means are used to act on objects, you can deduce that people are also objects in this event-space. The SLE info processing definitely sees people as objects, but it's subtle and pervasive enough that most SLEs probably don't notice it themselves. I probably sound like a total douche, but whatever. I obviously know that people are people and I try to act accordingly, but I've come to notice that most SLE blunders or asshole-behaviors are because of the people-as-object information processing. Now of course I see my friends and loved ones as super people, but if they act as obstacles then my first instinct is to react using comfortable means.


The "snapshot" aspect of processing the objects in space makes me want to act on obstacles that seem like they're not going anywhere themselves. I always have the urge to do something, unless the object is unimportant or seems like it might do something on its own that can help me. The urge to act is another major cause of SLE blunders.


SLE self growth comes from learning to use awkward means and by putting in the effort to learn about other people. And also learning how to wait for things.

More to come, if there's interest.

... Interesting that you say you see abstract ideas of tasks you need to do as "objects in space". I would prefer to describe them as concept-objects in my mental map or mental space. Talking about it the way you are seems like another level of meta-ness I'm not used to seeing my thinking as being ... I certainly don't experience it that way or think of my experiences in that way. Like I know that Ni is basically the inverted version of Se but somehow the way you're terming things leads to what seems like a weird form of conceptualization to me. I know that I organize information about the world in a pretty structured way and that things sort of become discrete pieces of information in my mind that way, but I see how I register the world in my mind as something that is separate from the actual world outside my mind. I see reality as being beyond something that I can structure completely using language/concept, even though my mind is oriented towards structuring it logically. So while in effect I'm doing something like you described, I find your description foreign and hard to relate to through a first person POV. Of course, it could just be a semantics issue I'm having with it or it could just be to do with you describing something very specific here (just abstract objects processing, as you said). But I'm not sure that it's just that. I am not just floating in some void where events pass through me without me being a part of it or aware of myself being just as much of an "object" as other objects are, from my POV. I feel a lot more fundamentally grounded and involved as a part of the world too most of the time compared to the style of thinking you're describing. Of course I can get detached too, but the starting-point frame of mind your mind inhabits seems fundamentally different from mine. Like, this is pretty meta.

Tldr I wouldn't mix the concepts of mental space and physical space, since we also have terms and concepts like those associated with Se vs. Ni from socionics to deal with around here. But within just the scope of the topic of your post, if we're just entertaining thoughts about our processing in a meta way, I can accept it.

If we're going to think of ideas as objects though, I would say I definitely think about/perceive "time" as one of these "objects in space". There is always a time element to the actions I take (your abstract objects in space processing model seems very oversimplified and incomplete relative to my own experience, and one of the main reasons is that the role timing plays is lacking...I see time as something that can be interacted with and controlled almost, or at least to a greater degree than how you've described). But, it also doesn't just exist to me as an "object in space"; it also permeates through my mind and body as much as Se does. In fact I would say it is one of the bridges between mental and physical space for me.

Nice to see another SLE around who can form complete sentences anyhow. Welcome.

Nice :) Of course, two different SLEs may experience the world a bit differently but it's very helpful to describe one's thought process in detail.

A very good read, looking forward to future insights :thumbsup: Aside from the topics you already mentioned, can you talk about your HA in depth, also in connection to the entirety of the IE process?

I like OP's description. I relate to quite a lot of it though no, not all of it. I'm less extraverted and broad to sum it up. More focus on things beyond the pure objects, too.

The static objects with the space based orientation, including the "abstract" objects in that "mental space" - I don't actually see that as abstract or mental like with Intuition - is very familiar to me but I'm more linear and less flexible with handling it all in one, especially with certain more abstract aspects that are no longer linked to direct space for me like they are for OP, my pov by default.

I easily extend the awareness of objects inside this spatial aspect in a sense and then treat things significantly less linearly and so also with more flexibility but that's just my secondary mode. Doubtful I'd ever look as flexible-mobile as an SLE.

Also, OP overall sounds like having a wider focus of sorts and much much less about prioritizing things in structures - in my case I have that both for the directly visible objects in actual space and for the more abstractly "visualized" objects. Those often have deep levels of hierarchies.

Don't have an issue with objects acting unpredictably except with certain er, people objects (just some of them). Oh and yeah I somewhat relate to the people-as-object information processing part as well but I think my version is more impersonal-detached than yours.


@niffer
As for physical vs mental space: I do not think it's that simple. I wouldn't associate the issue of mental space vs physical space with Se vs Ni directly. I didn't see OP as going into Intuition area when describing the "abstract" part.

Btw I saw OP's style pretty grounded and involved. Very extraverted and practical, quite Se. I see you as less grounded and involved actually in your writing style lol, more Ti-ish. (It's cool btw.) I dunno what you meant by the floating thingy, that's not how I experienced OP's description, more like a very realistic description of moving around objects and manipulating them freely. Yes the focus is less inwards sure (true of me too).

As for your description of your thinking, I definitely relate to some parts of it closely, too. I told you before that I see you randomly sharing some bits of Ti analysis (on Socionics) that are basically the same as how I put more abstract things into words sometimes. The only difference is that I do seem to go deeper with it and refine some things more than you do but the style is the exact same. Then at other times, I'm not really like that but more concretely structuring things in a sense. I don't really see you do it that way. You always seem more abstract in a way compared to me.

Quote:

---

I know that I organize information about the world in a pretty structured way and that things sort of become discrete pieces of information in my mind that way, but I see how I register the world in my mind as something that is separate from the actual world outside my mind.

---

Can you say more on this, the first part specifically? On the surface I relate to how you put all that, with things becoming discrete pieces etc. The wording on "becoming" was a bit strange to me, so please elaborate on that, too, if you are able to.

Quote:

---

I find your description foreign and hard to relate to through a first person POV.

---

Okay, a difference between us is that I find OP's description easy to relate to as long as it doesn't get to the Fe parts. :) And the complete lack of Ni is unrelatable too. The Se parts yes I relate easily to that in my "secondary mode" but with much more of a Ni layer or channel along with where the time aspect comes up in the description.

Quote:

---

I see time as something that can be interacted with and controlled almost

---

Can you say more on this too? Sounds cool the way you put it.



Anyway... I did write pieces before about how I think, if I have time I can try and put it together for a post like this (just for LSI, not SLE, well the people that still type me SLE can try and categorize it as SLE if they see a way to do it lol but good luck to that). :)

@Ananke if you want to write about your version it would be cool :)

Thanks for the replies, guys! I definitely want to clarify a few things and add extra context to what I wrote, especially in response to what niffer wrote.


First off, my post was not at all intended to address the immediate/concrete processing that happens more often for me. That'll be a different post. My natural thinking patterns definitely aren't meta :lol: but the only way I could describe my mind's "concretization" of abstractions was to write about it in a meta way. Otherwise, Se gets reduced to just force and then Socionics becomes a horoscope. Also, I'm a teacher and part of my training was to learn how to think about thoughts in this way. I came up with my description when I was lying in bed awake one night; when you have like four hours to analyze stuff, interesting things happen!


Onto individual points:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

... Interesting that you say you see abstract ideas of tasks you need to do as "objects in space". I would prefer to describe them as concept-objects in my mental map or mental space.

---

I have a feeling we're actually talking about similar things here.

Quote:

---

Talking about it the way you are seems like another level of meta-ness I'm not used to seeing my thinking as being ... I certainly don't experience it that way or think of my experiences in that way. Like I know that Ni is basically the inverted version of Se but somehow the way you're terming things leads to what seems like a weird form of conceptualization to me.

---

I don't think about my thoughts that much, except for when insomnia hits. :lol: I wonder how much semantics/writing style has to do with this.

Quote:

---

I know that I organize information about the world in a pretty structured way and that things sort of become discrete pieces of information in my mind that way, but I see how I register the world in my mind as something that is separate from the actual world outside my mind.

---

My thought organization is pretty structured, but I don't have as much of a distinction as you do between the mind world and the outside world.

Quote:

---

I see reality as being beyond something that I can structure completely using language/concept, even though my mind is oriented towards structuring it logically.

---

Agreed. My description was my best shot at verbalizing the nonverbal (challenge accepted! :hello: ). Whatever I can structure of reality gets put in that object-space; whatever can't be structured, well...it's not in there and I'll never have a way of knowing it!

Quote:

---

So while in effect I'm doing something like you described, I find your description foreign and hard to relate to through a first person POV. Of course, it could just be a semantics issue I'm having with it or it could just be to do with you describing something very specific here (just abstract objects processing, as you said).

---

Both semantics and something very specific.

Quote:

---

But I'm not sure that it's just that. I am not just floating in some void where events pass through me without me being a part of it or aware of myself being just as much of an "object" as other objects are, from my POV. I feel a lot more fundamentally grounded and involved as a part of the world too most of the time compared to the style of thinking you're describing. Of course I can get detached too, but the starting-point frame of mind your mind inhabits seems fundamentally different from mine. Like, this is pretty meta.

---

I can't say I interpret myself as floating in some void space. Rather, what I was trying to get at was that my attention isn't self-focused when I'm processing abstract objects in said space. Of course, many of the objects are fundamentally self-focused (e.g., getting a job is ME getting a job, and I'm therefore really at the center of it), but that's not what I think about at all. I relate very much to what you say about the groundedness/involvedness. This is what it feels like pretty much always. My description was trying to get at the "software" underlying that state, and there's no non-meta way to do this that I know of.

Quote:

---

Tldr I wouldn't mix the concepts of mental space and physical space, since we also have terms and concepts like those associated with Se vs. Ni from socionics to deal with around here. But within just the scope of the topic of your post, if we're just entertaining thoughts about our processing in a meta way, I can accept it.

---

That's exactly what my post intended. :D

Quote:

---

If we're going to think of ideas as objects though, I would say I definitely think about/perceive "time" as one of these "objects in space".

---

I process time as physical space that can contain objects. I guess time and what I called "unfolding situations" are analogous. I'd definitely like to hear more about your interpretation here.

Quote:

---

There is always a time element to the actions I take (your abstract objects in space processing model seems very oversimplified and incomplete relative to my own experience, and one of the main reasons is that the role timing plays is lacking...I see time as something that can be interacted with and controlled almost, or at least to a greater degree than how you've described).

---

I see the control of time as a direct effect of controlling the objects within the timespace. So, all that object interaction I talked about could extend to time. This is something I'll think about more and add to. If you think my model is incomplete, feel free to add to it too! It would be great to get your thoughts on this too, to help cut through what's semantics, what's missing, and what's not type-related. I could write a book on all this but I work fulltime, so it can't happen in one post or in one day.

Quote:

---

But, it also doesn't just exist to me as an "object in space"; it also permeates through my mind and body as much as Se does. In fact I would say it is one of the bridges between mental and physical space for me.

---

I agree with the first sentence, in that time is an aspect of the space for me. I just consider the mental space to be physical space, so I don't draw that distinction.

Quote:

---

Nice to see another SLE around who can form complete sentences anyhow. Welcome.

---

Thanks! I've actually been here for longer than you'll ever know...


incomplete sentence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chae

A very good read, looking forward to future insights :thumbsup: Aside from the topics you already mentioned, can you talk about your HA in depth, also in connection to the entirety of the IE process?

---

Yep, I'll add this to my list. Good suggestion! I have a feeling that this topic will be colored quite a bit by enneagram/instinct stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

I like OP's description. I relate to quite a lot of it though no, not all of it. I'm less extraverted and broad to sum it up. More focus on things beyond the pure objects, too.

The static objects with the space based orientation, including the "abstract" objects in that "mental space" - I don't actually see that as abstract or mental like with Intuition - is very familiar to me but I'm more linear and less flexible with handling it all in one, especially with certain more abstract aspects that are no longer linked to direct space for me like they are for OP, my pov by default.

I easily extend the awareness of objects inside this spatial aspect in a sense and then treat things significantly less linearly and so also with more flexibility but that's just my secondary mode. Doubtful I'd ever look as flexible-mobile as an SLE.

Also, OP overall sounds like having a wider focus of sorts and much much less about prioritizing things in structures - in my case I have that both for the directly visible objects in actual space and for the more abstractly "visualized" objects. Those often have deep levels of hierarchies.

Don't have an issue with objects acting unpredictably except with certain er, people objects (just some of them). Oh and yeah I somewhat relate to the people-as-object information processing part as well but I think my version is more impersonal-detached than yours.

---

I'd be really interested to see a LSI thread on similar subjects. That would give a really good illustration of mirror differences in general. Interesting about what you say of the prioritizing within the structures. I do that too but more on a whim. #TiCreativeBro I'd like to hear more about what you said with the impersonal-detached people processing.

I think we need a to make a Beta ST band called People Objects.

Quote:

---

Okay, a difference between us is that I find OP's description easy to relate to as long as it doesn't get to the Fe parts. :) And the complete lack of Ni is unrelatable too. The Se parts yes I relate easily to that in my "secondary mode" but with much more of a Ni layer or channel along with where the time aspect comes up in the description.

---

I could try to get into some real Ni stuff but I can't promise I won't suck at it! :o

Quote:

---

Anyway... I did write pieces before about how I think, if I have time I can try and put it together for a post like this (just for LSI, not SLE, well the people that still type me SLE can try and categorize it as SLE if they see a way to do it lol but good luck to that). :)

---

Do it!! Fuck the haters!

Thanks for taking the time to clear things up! :content: I can relate more fully with how you're thinking of it with that. Actually you put what I was thinking in a better way in your post than I did. ( @Myst you can just read over H2's response to me to see more of what I meant.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H 2

First off, my post was not at all intended to address the immediate/concrete processing that happens more often for me. That'll be a different post. My natural thinking patterns definitely aren't meta :lol: but the only way I could describe my mind's "concretization" of abstractions was to write about it in a meta way. Otherwise, Se gets reduced to just force and then Socionics becomes a horoscope. Also, I'm a teacher and part of my training was to learn how to think about thoughts in this way. I came up with my description when I was lying in bed awake one night; when you have like four hours to analyze stuff, interesting things happen!

---

That's what I thought ;) About you not being "meta" by default. But wasn't this describing the immediate processing that happens for you by default?

Btw explain this one more about how you see Socionics becoming a horoscope lol

Quote:

---

My thought organization is pretty structured, but I don't have as much of a distinction as you do between the mind world and the outside world.

---

You call "pretty structured" the stuff you talk of in your OP (e.g. the different kinds of means) or is there anything else to it?

Quote:

---

I process time as physical space that can contain objects. I guess time and what I called "unfolding situations" are analogous. I'd definitely like to hear more about your interpretation here.

---

You weren't asking me but I think I have more than one way to process time. Primary one is spatial, based on the stuff and the situations around me incl. controlling the objects as you put it. I have a secondary one only subconsciously about feeling time more abstractly and that's hard to describe.

But for example, where you say "You just go out and buy anything necessary and then the "dress" object disappears, while the other objects shift closer. That's a new snapshot". That's complete lack of Ni to me. I instead have a timeline/course for things -the more "abstract" objects in more "abstract" situations- in my mind that just comes up on its own (not all under conscious control). The objects don't shift in it like this, not spatially but based on timing instead. So I would think this aspect is more Ni for me. My thinking with priorities and deep hierarchies and all that also ties into this, I will have the "dress object" (or equivalent of this) inside that structuring along with that timeline.

Quote:

---

Thanks! I've actually been here for longer than you'll ever know...

---

Under different nick? Or as a lurker?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H 2

I'd be really interested to see a LSI thread on similar subjects. That would give a really good illustration of mirror differences in general. Interesting about what you say of the prioritizing within the structures. I do that too but more on a whim. #TiCreativeBro I'd like to hear more about what you said with the impersonal-detached people processing.

---

Lol. Btw I can do the prioritizing stuff on the move but I don't like to change it once I figured out the best way. I don't always have time to perfect it.

The impersonal object-people processing: well, you said "Confront someone directly about something, but only if you're certain that it won't cause any relationship/emotional backlash that you're not able to ignore". I'm more oblivious about this personal aspect (relationship/emotional aspects you mention). Also that thing about charming people directly, I don't do that. My version of diplomacy is probably also a lot more impersonal than yours.

Btw while we are at it, I'd say, for me the comfortable means would be, the ones you also find comfortable but also the mapping out plans (draft of a plan definitely, or a detailed one when I have enough detail/information available that I decide to use), the impersonal diplomacy also. The wading through paperwork is neutral to me too, but trying to do people-charming directly would be far worse than awkward - impossible. :lol:

Can I also ask, what are your plans like? It's hard for me to imagine to not move inside the "box" of a plan. Even when it's just a draft of main logical points that I make up very quickly at the moment that I start moving. Even when this draft (or other plan or understanding of the situation/general issue) does allow a lot of moving around manipulating the objects seemingly haphazardly and spontaneously.

Quote:

---

I think we need a to make a Beta ST band called People Objects.

---

:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

I could try to get into some real Ni stuff but I can't promise I won't suck at it! :o

---

That's fine! :cool: I mean, do get into it and don't worry about it :)

Quote:

---

Do it!! Fuck the haters!

---

Hahaha ok. They aren't haters btw lol (only the people that want to type me ILE or IEE sporadically.. more lol). It's just that there isn't a consensus on which beta ST I am. If I dig in a bit I still can get myself confused too for a second. The mind is complex and these typology models don't account for much of the nuance that I run into when digging. But I digged deep enough to see that my choice for my typing is correct.


@niffer

This is still left unanswered if you got time please :) see below

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

I know that I organize information about the world in a pretty structured way and that things sort of become discrete pieces of information in my mind that way, but I see how I register the world in my mind as something that is separate from the actual world outside my mind.

---

Can you say more on this, the first part specifically? On the surface I relate to how you put all that, with things becoming discrete pieces etc. The wording on "becoming" was a bit strange to me, so please elaborate on that, too, if you are able to.

---

Well as your dual, when you said this:

"Do a job yourself if everyone else will slow things down (e.g., don't ask for permission or others' preferences);
Get someone else to do the job for you if they're willing and will do it better or more conveniently than you can at the time (e.g., tell everyone you know about your job search intentions, and some of them will volunteer to make connections for you);
Confront someone directly about something, but only if you're certain that it won't cause any relationship/emotional backlash that you're not able to ignore"

It made me feel warm and fuzzy inside lol. <3 Because it just means I can kind of be how I naturally am with no clashes and you can be who you are. I mean it ain't that simplistic cuz in social situations there is often more than just the SLE/IEI and nothing really exists in a vacuum but still it is soothing.

@Myst

"Can you say more on this, the first part specifically? On the surface I relate to how you put all that, with things becoming discrete pieces etc. The wording on "becoming" was a bit strange to me, so please elaborate on that, too, if you are able to."

I'm not fully certain if I'm able to see into my own workings enough to know if I'm getting this right, but it's like information about the world enters my mind and joins into the rest of my map of knowledge about the world. For example looking at a plastic bag, I would subconsciously (or consciously, if I want) absorb info about its physical location in the world at this point in time, how it was positioned, patterns printed onto it, colors .... and then this information would float around and naturally form attachments to other even vaguely related info in my mind. For example seeing the same printed patterns elsewhere I could feel like I've seen them before and have forgotten why, or I might remember the bag. Or looking at/thinking of those patterns, I could be reminded of myriad other things in my knowledge map that have reminiscent qualities. Each of these "things"/qualities is implicitly packaged automatically in there with its own name (otherwise I will describe it or ascribe a name to it if I need to when I consciously pull it up in my mind), as well as the relationships between information.... so while there's a lot of implicitness and interconnection going on there, at the same time the pieces of information also take on a "discrete" form.

Let me know if that answers your question or not.

The way you describe processing time, with two 'modes' is more familiar to me too, as well as the timeline shifting of objects. Something like that is part of why I felt something was missing in the OP model in terms of how I process life. Could you please explain more about having deep levels of hierarchies?--What might be an example of that? I have a feeling I might relate to you more with that too.

The notion of time as a subset/emergent quality of physical space/objects boggles my mind. :lol: It's the other way around for me! There is a sense of 'flow' and everything else moves within that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuavaDrunk

The notion of time as a subset/emergent quality of physical space/objects boggles my mind. :lol: It's the other way around for me! There is a sense of 'flow' and everything else moves within that.

---

The idea that Time is an emergent quality of space is what you get when you play with the equations too much, and chase them (which are only approximations to reality) all the way to their logical ends. Singularities are the same kind of thing. Sometimes this works (prediction of anti-matter) and sometimes it doesn't (solutions of Electromagnetic equations at TIR interfaces). Yes, you can re-write all the fundamental equations of Physics to exclude Time. Anyone who has played with Lagrangians has seen this kind of transformation. That doesn't mean that blindly doing this is going to get you to some place real.

Usually, when you bump up against something like this, it means that it is time to reformulate the concepts and the equations to be better descriptors.

Rather than Time being emergent from space, is likely that Causation is more fundamental than space or objects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal..._triangulation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

The idea that Time is an emergent quality of space is what you get when you play with the equations too much, and chase them (which are only approximations to reality) all the way to their logical ends. Singularities are the same kind of thing. Sometimes this works (prediction of anti-matter) and sometimes it doesn't (solutions of Electromagnetic equations at TIR interfaces). Yes, you can re-write all the fundamental equations of Physics to exclude Time. Anyone who has played with Lagrangians has seen this kind of transformation. That doesn't mean that blindly doing this is going to get you to some place real.

Usually, when you bump up against something like this, it means that it is time to reformulate the concepts and the equations to be better descriptors.

Rather than Time being emergent from space, is likely that Causation is more fundamental than space or objects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal..._triangulation

---

Sure, except that the thread is about worldviews and how people's brains work, not about science.

You guys are the nerdiest SLEs I've ever witnessed :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

@Myst

"Can you say more on this, the first part specifically? On the surface I relate to how you put all that, with things becoming discrete pieces etc. The wording on "becoming" was a bit strange to me, so please elaborate on that, too, if you are able to."

I'm not fully certain if I'm able to see into my own workings enough to know if I'm getting this right, but it's like information about the world enters my mind and joins into the rest of my map of knowledge about the world. For example looking at a plastic bag, I would subconsciously (or consciously, if I want) absorb info about its physical location in the world at this point in time, how it was positioned, patterns printed onto it, colors .... and then this information would float around and naturally form attachments to other even vaguely related info in my mind. For example seeing the same printed patterns elsewhere I could feel like I've seen them before and have forgotten why, or I might remember the bag. Or looking at/thinking of those patterns, I could be reminded of myriad other things in my knowledge map that have reminiscent qualities. Each of these "things"/qualities is implicitly packaged automatically in there with its own name (otherwise I will describe it or ascribe a name to it if I need to when I consciously pull it up in my mind), as well as the relationships between information.... so while there's a lot of implicitness and interconnection going on there, at the same time the pieces of information also take on a "discrete" form.

Let me know if that answers your question or not.

---

OK. The phrasing on them "becoming" discrete form was weird to me because for me that's the default. That's what I see by default. Discrete pieces/things. Call it my Rationality I guess.

I can't relate to your example on the plastic bag, like, at all. With patterns, I see logical patterns first and foremost. Less focused on sensory patterns like you describe this. I don't have associative thinking like this at all. :) Sounds like Irrationality. Ti comes in front of the Se for me there I guess. That is, I just don't associate things directly using such sensory patterns like you describe. Objects, when I focus on objects directly, are too discretely seen for that.

Well the one thing I can relate to in the example is, I do have the part of "absorb info about its physical location in the world at this point in time, how it was positioned, patterns printed onto it, colors". That's a snapshot I will definitely have, but actually, I usually see more than that plastic bag, I also see it as an object placed relative to everything else in the entire spatial situation as well. So that's the entire snapshot for me. Not sure if yours includes the relative positionings as well. Objects for me by default are "embedded" in that. I can also look at an object directly if I want to, of course, looking at it more closely than usual.

Quote:

---

The way you describe processing time, with two 'modes' is more familiar to me too, as well as the timeline shifting of objects. Something like that is part of why I felt something was missing in the OP model in terms of how I process life. Could you please explain more about having deep levels of hierarchies?--What might be an example of that? I have a feeling I might relate to you more with that too.

---

Timeline - how do you shift objects there? I explicitly said I shift some timings. Not the objects themselves but the timing is what I shift. The Ni part of the timing is not really very conscious for me but I can kinda see it if I really squint :) A bit like @GuavaDrunk described it, though it really isn't in my face by default, noo. Just sometimes I can notice it a little bit. Not the flow itself, that'd require some really inspired state for a second or two here or there, but something related to it - that is, in my plans, the sense of timing is not fully spatial but uses the results of what this flow would show as good enough timing unconsciously. Essentially, I take some "feels" of timing and work with that. But to emphasize, by default all I can notice consciously when I squint hard is the fact that this is not fully spatial, it's spatial too but also something beyond that a bit.

Deep levels of hierarchies: well there's some system (any system), it has core principles of the system as prioritized at the top level then everything else just follows from that. Then those levels can go pretty deep in the sense of there being quite some of them. What is your version like?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuavaDrunk

The notion of time as a subset/emergent quality of physical space/objects boggles my mind. :lol: It's the other way around for me! There is a sense of 'flow' and everything else moves within that.

---

To me it's pretty natural, that spatial sense of time :) The flow thingy I hardly if ever directly consciously see but it sounds cool. I half-consciously manipulate it a bit in my plans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peteronfireee

You guys are the nerdiest SLEs I've ever witnessed :lol:

---

Do you want to describe some of your way of thinking too? :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

OK. The phrasing on them "becoming" discrete form was weird to me because for me that's the default. That's what I see by default. Discrete pieces/things. Call it my Rationality I guess.

---

Oh, well I just said "becoming" because I was talking about the outside world entering my mind as information -- becoming information just in general, even before any idea of processing and sorting it. I think this was just some overfocus in trying to interpret what I said lol.

Quote:

---

Well the one thing I can relate to in the example is, I do have the part of "absorb info about its physical location in the world at this point in time, how it was positioned, patterns printed onto it, colors". That's a snapshot I will definitely have, but actually, I usually see more than that plastic bag, I also see it as an object placed relative to everything else in the entire spatial situation as well. So that's the entire snapshot for me. Not sure if yours includes the relative positionings as well. Objects for me by default are "embedded" in that. I can also look at an object directly if I want to, of course, looking at it more closely than usual.

---

Yeah, I see relative placements in entire spatial situations too.
The plastic bag thing would be an example of me "looking more closely than usual", especially with thinking about things the patterns remind me of.

Quote:

---

Timeline - how do you shift objects there? I explicitly said I shift some timings. Not the objects themselves but the timing is what I shift. The Ni part of the timing is not really very conscious for me but I can kinda see it if I really squint :) A bit like @GuavaDrunk described it, though it really isn't in my face by default, noo. Just sometimes I can notice it a little bit. Not the flow itself, that'd require some really inspired state for a second or two here or there, but something related to it - that is, in my plans, the sense of timing is not fully spatial but uses the results of what this flow would show as good enough timing unconsciously. Essentially, I take some "feels" of timing and work with that. But to emphasize, by default all I can notice consciously when I squint hard is the fact that this is not fully spatial, it's spatial too but also something beyond that a bit.

---

Yeah this works for me too. I didn't get a conscious sense of it at all until I turned 20 though (a feels sense of timing and everything else here). Before that it was more like the snapshots, and like I was always trapped within the current snapshot of the moment that I was living in.

Quote:

---

Deep levels of hierarchies: well there's some system (any system), it has core principles of the system as prioritized at the top level then everything else just follows from that. Then those levels can go pretty deep in the sense of there being quite some of them. What is your version like?

---

Can you give a simple example of this with a few hierarchies using some topic? Do you have an example of this within a planning scenario? (I'll answer if my idea of it was even remotely on point with what you do ;P otherwise I'd just be imagining something irrelevant.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

Oh, well I just said "becoming" because I was talking about the outside world entering my mind as information -- becoming information just in general, even before any idea of processing and sorting it. I think this was just some overfocus in trying to interpret what I said lol.

---

Overfocus? Just as I read the original sentence from you, it instantly jumped out at me as strange/needing explanation. :lol: Awakening curiosity, definitely.

Not sure what you mean by "information" here that you see before sorting it. It's the sensory patterns before sorting them?

Quote:

---

Yeah, I see relative placements in entire spatial situations too.
The plastic bag thing would be an example of me "looking more closely than usual", especially with thinking about things the patterns remind me of.

---

@Ananke also talked about such sensory patterns. Interesting but not how I work O_o

If I look more closely than usual, I don't associate to other objects by default. I don't even like to associate then, for some reason.

Would you say your perception of the objects in space is relative to you? Or it's all perceived together relative to each other, without yourself in that picture?

Quote:

---

Yeah this works for me too. I didn't get a conscious sense of it at all until I turned 20 though (a feels sense of timing and everything else here). Before that it was more like the snapshots, and like I was always trapped within the current snapshot of the moment that I was living in.

---

I do very much feel in the moment myself, just like I describe in my 80q, "time is something like this... you are in the present, now, an almost nonexistently thin imaginary line or vertical snapshot on a timeline from past to future. The past doesn't exist, the future doesn't exist, only your present moment exists. This is a conundrum to me. But, I do have the present at least and that's fine by me, thankyou very much :)".

But it's overkill to say I was ever trapped within the snapshot of the current moment. Dunno, I never felt trapped.

"Feel" of timing, that has an aspect that's got a spatial basis and an aspect that does not, I don't know if you were thinking of the former only. I'm curious if you were thinking of the latter too and if so what it looks like for you :)

Interesting also how you got more awareness of the timing thingy - whatever it may be - at around 20. I don't recall a change in this for myself, except maybe relatively recently, with some extra glimpses of the actual flow that GuavaDrunk talked of. It's weird :lol:

Quote:

---

Can you give a simple example of this with a few hierarchies using some topic? Do you have an example of this within a planning scenario? (I'll answer if my idea of it was even remotely on point with what you do ;P otherwise I'd just be imagining something irrelevant.)

---

Just describe your version, it's ok if it's not the same thing :) I'm curious.

Example, how detailed do you want it to get? It's basically with me having had the core principles put together after analyzing it all painstakingly. Things that I don't usually see other people express as actual principles. So, then, I just try to see the core from which everything else really follows by logical deductions connecting them. If it's a system put in explicit rules then I want the subordinated rules to follow (by some reasoning) from the main rules. They can't contradict the ones on higher levels.

Planning scenario, hm same thing really. I mentioned the quick draft of a plan yeah? That has main logical points only. I can again put other points "under" the main ones. Those other ones can get really really detailed if I want them to, all of them having a fixed "place". Less flexible, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

Do you want to describe some of your way of thinking too? :p

---

nah

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peteronfireee

nah

---

So lazy.

i'm drunk

i love you @Herzy i hope you have time to post more if u can

When I look at buildings, especially like tall buildings, apartments etc. (we have quite a lot of those near where I live...), I actually often think about how it was built... how long it took to build, how many man-hours it took to build, and possibly how much it cost to build... Then I start to imagine the insides of the buildings, as if it were a 3D computer model... I notice how each of the rooms are identical, which makes me wonder if it makes it easier and faster to build... these are mass-built and produced. I think about how fascinating that is. Some architects and engineers designed them... they must be geniuses. I wonder about things like safety and standards. Then I imagine the building when it was still under construction, with the cranes and workers and builders and everything... then I start imagining architects and engineers, designing these buildings with their blueprints in a room... (they are rather stereotypical). Then I start imagining how some real estate managers and bosses decided to erect a building here, on this land... and I wonder about how much money it cost, and how much money they're making, renting people their rooms... Then I start to think some vague ideas about capitalism... money, flow, investment, resources, demand... It's like why... I guess these architects and engineers are just happy being hired by some building company, whom build for the real estaters... It seems like a pretty easy way to make a ton of money, folks...

Then I walk around more to the store and I look at regular people going to the store to shop... and I think, "What a bunch of sheep! So unthinking and unaware of how things are"... no, actually I don't think that... but I do think about the current political climate and... yeah. Things aren't looking good, folks. I think about how most of these people aren't politically inclined. It's a shame that they're not. I think about where this country is going, people could be affecting and changing things for good. Then I look at some housewives... and I imagine them going back to their houses and apartments... and I visualize them being inside of their homes, cooking for their family or whatever. Why do I imagine these things? I don't know... I often imagine where people are going, what they will be doing in the future, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herzy

Sounds Te-ish, Sing! :o

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbusENG6hCE

Do you ever think that if there was thing like movable bridge or maybe if you could cover with one and change its coverage dynamically? It would be cool if there was a building that reached into outer space (nanotubes). How about linking high buildings into paths as another way of faster light transportation. It's crazy....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herzy

Sounds Te-ish, Sing! :o

---

Extremely so.Te but there's also some component analysis. Good resource to keep in your back pocket, though.
I think bit of :Te: assisted :Fi: imaging families and their roles. So empathy can be reduced to feely robotics? :thinking:

Wow I really, really wish I had found this thread sooner. I've been battling with types for a long time both in Socionics ad MBTI mostly due to the Se/Ni placement in the functional stacking of SLE (too much intuition to be a Sensory type, too much sensory awareness and prowess to fit most Intuitive types).Some of the profiles on SLE available fit me to a T, but when it comes to the actual stacking, it ever made any sense for me to struggle with :Ni: when perceiving and understanding time is one of my trademarks. But this thread really clears it up, and shows how you can't sorely base your typing of people by how they act or express themselves, or any "vibes" they put off.

Not only can't I relate to anything written by SLEs here as I can't even conceive what it's like to function like that. It's a completely foreign concept I can't wrap my mind around right now. I feel like I've just read a text in Greek or Russian, there's nothing remotely familiar or recognizable here. Like really really weird, I don't see the world like that at all. So it's final.

I'm not a SLE.

yeah @Herzy if anybody irl just suddenly pushed me I would not like it so it's silly to think that's Se dual seeking lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herzy

Glad I could help! This is why I created the thread to begin with; I noticed that the standard Se descriptions were very one-sided ("Se is all about aggressively shoving people out of your way"), and they said nothing about what it's actually like to have Se as a base function. I think it would be a great resource to have more threads like this one, written by people different types. That way, we can get past bad visual stereotypes and emphasize that Socionics is really a model of information processing.

So even what I wrote in thread post #23 sounded totally foreign to you?

---

Yes it did. I mean it's clear I most definitely value :Se:, but it isn't in a leading position. It's more of a background thing that sometimes seems to even "turn off" for brief periods. Or maybe I just lose conscience about it, because things like getting hit by something for example almost never ever happens, I have some sort of "spider sense" it seems. The thing about the clarity/sharpness of how you literally see things and people (like a 5k image) hit home and also the always knowing where sounds are coming from (I have super fine hearing, I can hear and place sounds like four streets below mine, and it's useless to whisper around me).

Thing is I can't stay in physical reality observation mode for more than a short period unless I'm actively doing something with it, like playing a sport, hunting or photographing, or watching some sort of artistic display. It's just utterly boring and senseless otherwise, I'm going to give a specific example:my grandparents used to have this habit of placing themselves on chairs in their front yard or sometimes on the sidewalk in front of their houses after lunch, just to "observe the street". I could never understand what's the point of it, there's literally no joy or purpose in doing this, I mean, what do I get? People passing by, cars, it doesn't stimulate me at all, it doesn't feed my mind with anything. I become very itchy and impatient if I have to just stay put and observe the world so to speak, I'm like "Ok, so what am I supposed to be seeing?", it needs to have a point.

It can be quite fun when you have no choice but to do that (if you're not in a "daydream" mood) like waiting for a bus or something like that. I just don't see what's so interesting in the physical world around me itself. What's interesting it's what happens in it, and what I do in it. As a child and even now I've always been an environment explorer, I'm quite curious and fearless in that sense, but it's because there's something to be discovered, it's new and more importantly, it's active.

I also have this thing that don't really know if it's necessarily connected to cognitive type in a Jungian sense, but outsides noises are something I can't ignore at all unless I'm engaged on an interesting activity even if it's just an engaging conversation. Then I still can hear them, but they don't bother me, it's just white noise and I can still function on a high level. Otherwise if whatever I have to concentrate on isn't interesting, no matter how important, it's like virtually impossible to turn the world off because it's so loud and clear. It's almost like it's mocking me really, turning the volume up to see me suffer.

It's at it's worse with music, it's like both my brain and body are addicted to it and I react to it like a puppet. This is why I can't listen to any sort of music while doing chores or reading anything, my attention goes 100% to the music and I can't control it, it's quite bizarre. I also start to dance (not always full out, but like with my feet, shoulders, neck or snapping my fingers to the beat) and sing along or hum songs without realizing, this phenomenon has put me through many embarrassing situations in the past, though I'm used to it now and so are people who know me, it only baffles strangers. When I can identify the impulse to do it and stop myself, it's like it literally hurts me, I can't even explain how uncomfortable it is. It also happens with aggression, I'm not always conscious of my own, but other people are hyper aware, they say they can feel the "waves" coming out of me and it's like there's a forcefield or something. I wouldn't know, I can' feel it myself, when I'm mad my attention is 200% zeroed in whatever it is I want to snap. Like in a trance.

"SLE self growth comes from learning to use awkward means and by putting in the effort to learn about other people. And also learning how to wait for things."

Likewise, IEI self growth comes from stop being a pussy and to think of other people as chess pieces like you do to get what we want. And learning how to act in-the-now impulsively , instead of waiting patiently forever like some ******.

That is why IEI-SLE is so powerful together. Teach other the opposite lesson of what has to learn and so both people improve independently while at the same still get to keep their natural talents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LuckyOne

It's at it's worse with music, it's like both my brain and body are addicted to it and I react to it like a puppet. This is why I can't listen to any sort of music while doing chores or reading anything, my attention goes 100% to the music and I can't control it, it's quite bizarre. I also start to dance (not always full out, but like with my feet, shoulders, neck or snapping my fingers to the beat) and sing along or hum songs without realizing, this phenomenon has put me through many embarrassing situations in the past, though I'm used to it now and so are people who know me, it only baffles strangers. When I can identify the impulse to do it and stop myself, it's like it literally hurts me, I can't even explain how uncomfortable it is. It also happens with aggression, I'm not always conscious of my own, but other people are hyper aware, they say they can feel the "waves" coming out of me and it's like there's a forcefield or something. I wouldn't know, I can' feel it myself, when I'm mad my attention is 200% zeroed in whatever it is I want to snap. Like in a trance.

---

You're an SLE lol. Not that anyone needed to read this to know by now...

Anyone ever wonder why they call Esenin the "Lyricist"? ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

You're an SLE lol. Not that anyone needed to read this to know by now...

Anyone ever wonder why they call Esenin the "Lyricist"? ...

---

Explain to me how :Ni: works for you, then. Make me a believer by explaining away the one (huge) piece that never fit :popcorn: While you're at it elaborate on how Leading http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...smilies/Se.gif is for you.

Also who are "everyone"? lol, I don't think anyone here even knows who I am.


And why is Wikisocion offline? :tumble:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LuckyOne

Explain to me how :Ni: works for you, then. Make me a believer by explaining away the one (huge) piece that never fit :popcorn: While you're at it elaborate on how Leading :Se: is for you.

Also who are "everyone"? lol, I don't think anyone here even knows who I am.


And why is Wikisocion offline? :tumble:

---

Nevermind how your description of your cognition actually did match up with Herzy's. >_>

Wikisocion is doing that to troll your :Ni:.

Idk, I'm pretty lazy and don't like spending much undirected time in physical reality (or any time, in a way that's not directed by me), so asking me to elaborate? :) I'll just say your description hit home for me too. I almost feel like I'm very blended in with the environment and just reacting to it, like someone took an eraser and rubbed me out on a piece of paper. I hardly feel like I'm here a lot of the time while simultaneously feeling like I'm more grounded than others. It feels like I'm in an intimate dance with reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by niffer

Nevermind how your description of your cognition actually did match up with Herzy's. >_>

Wikisocion is doing that to troll your :Ni:.

Idk, I'm pretty lazy and don't like spending much undirected time in physical reality (or any time, in a way that's not directed by me), so asking me to elaborate? :) I'll just say your description hit home for me too. I almost feel like I'm very blended in with the environment and just reacting to it, like someone took an eraser and rubbed me out on a piece of paper. I hardly feel like I'm here a lot of the time while simultaneously feeling like I'm more grounded than others. It feels like I'm in an intimate dance with reality.

---

How...poetic :shifty: Did not expect this from you :lol:

But you forgot the :Ni: bit...:whistle: That's the actual point, really.

I downloaded Reinin's book and read it yesterday, it's precisely the fact his type profiles match so perfectly people I know that makes the whole thing so frustrating. The joke's on me, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LuckyOne

Yes it did. I mean it's clear I most definitely value :Se:, but it isn't in a leading position. It's more of a background thing that sometimes seems to even "turn off" for brief periods. Or maybe I just lose conscience about it, because things like getting hit by something for example almost never ever happens, I have some sort of "spider sense" it seems. The thing about the clarity/sharpness of how you literally see things and people (like a 5k image) hit home and also the always knowing where sounds are coming from (I have super fine hearing, I can hear and place sounds like four streets below mine, and it's useless to whisper around me).

Thing is I can't stay in physical reality observation mode for more than a short period unless I'm actively doing something with it, like playing a sport, hunting or photographing, or watching some sort of artistic display. It's just utterly boring and senseless otherwise, I'm going to give a specific example:my grandparents used to have this habit of placing themselves on chairs in their front yard or sometimes on the sidewalk in front of their houses after lunch, just to "observe the street". I could never understand what's the point of it, there's literally no joy or purpose in doing this, I mean, what do I get? People passing by, cars, it doesn't stimulate me at all, it doesn't feed my mind with anything. I become very itchy and impatient if I have to just stay put and observe the world so to speak, I'm like "Ok, so what am I supposed to be seeing?", it needs to have a point.

---

That's Si though, not Se.

Quote:

---

It can be quite fun when you have no choice but to do that (if you're not in a "daydream" mood) like waiting for a bus or something like that. I just don't see what's so interesting in the physical world around me itself. What's interesting it's what happens in it, and what I do in it. As a child and even now I've always been an environment explorer, I'm quite curious and fearless in that sense, but it's because there's something to be discovered, it's new and more importantly, it's active.

I also have this thing that don't really know if it's necessarily connected to cognitive type in a Jungian sense, but outsides noises are something I can't ignore at all unless I'm engaged on an interesting activity even if it's just an engaging conversation. Then I still can hear them, but they don't bother me, it's just white noise and I can still function on a high level. Otherwise if whatever I have to concentrate on isn't interesting, no matter how important, it's like virtually impossible to turn the world off because it's so loud and clear. It's almost like it's mocking me really, turning the volume up to see me suffer.

It's at it's worse with music, it's like both my brain and body are addicted to it and I react to it like a puppet. This is why I can't listen to any sort of music while doing chores or reading anything, my attention goes 100% to the music and I can't control it, it's quite bizarre. I also start to dance (not always full out, but like with my feet, shoulders, neck or snapping my fingers to the beat) and sing along or hum songs without realizing, this phenomenon has put me through many embarrassing situations in the past, though I'm used to it now and so are people who know me, it only baffles strangers. When I can identify the impulse to do it and stop myself, it's like it literally hurts me, I can't even explain how uncomfortable it is. It also happens with aggression, I'm not always conscious of my own, but other people are hyper aware, they say they can feel the "waves" coming out of me and it's like there's a forcefield or something. I wouldn't know, I can' feel it myself, when I'm mad my attention is 200% zeroed in whatever it is I want to snap. Like in a trance.

---

This sounds like extroverted Se valuer to me, more likely Beta. There is a big emotional component to what you're talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehotelambush

That's Si though, not Se.

---

The second half fits the Socionics definition of it, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehotelambush

This sounds like extroverted Se valuer to me, more likely Beta. There is a big emotional component to what you're talking about.

---

I was reading the forum members typing thread yesterday and someone was commenting on how a said supposed LSI user tend to question the theory when his typing doesn't fit it, instead of doing the opposite. I find myself doing it all the time with Socionics, because neither of the two possible types fits when I actually get to the functions. SLE doesn't fit because of it's :Ni: usage, and EIE doesn't fit because of both :Si: (as you can see mine is fine) and it's general attitude towards logic.

I considered LIE for a while but there's no way, I'm actually gonna look into other approaches to the stackings besides Model A for the first time. Because while the types themselves, subtypes and even inter types relations work very neaty compared to what I observe in reality, when I read the function by function profiles of real people types, there are major inconsistencies with real people of said types.

Considering temperaments (Ep, Ej, Ip, Ij)
For all Eps the common thing is cycle between laziness and bursts of energy (and hence people get varied first expressions out of you... and tight schedule might become destructive in terms of expected output). Ejs are steady.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unsuccessfull Alphamale

Considering temperaments (Ep, Ej, Ip, Ij)
For all Eps the common thing is cycle between laziness and bursts of energy (and hence people get varied first expressions out of you... and tight schedule might become destructive in terms of expected output). Ejs are steady.

---

Not sure this is directed at me but if it is, then this is how I fit the temperaments:

Quote:

---

EP temperament

The EP temperament, or flexible-maneuvering temperament, was identified by Viktor DarkAngelFireWolf69 and includes the four irrational extroverts (one in each quadra): ILE, SLE, SEE, and IEE. Each of these types is also static.


Typical characteristics:
flexible
mobile
impulsive, shifting from apparent inactivity to bursts of energy, often several times a day, showing impatience during them
walk is energetic but "cat-like"
often seems optimistic and open-minded
inclined to fidget when forced to remain inactive for long periods
entertains people easily and naturally
EPs are both static and irrational, so they perceive reality as mostly not changing, and when it does, it's in abrupt "leaps" from one state to another. An EP is bothered by the lack of change, especially as seen through his leading function, since his personal preference is for change. That makes him impulsive, with sudden bursts of action, energy, or even just thought, as he tries to get his perceptions "moving".


As extroverts, EPs tend to be feel that it is up to them to initiate contacts with other people, and EPs in particular tend to feel quite natural in that role.


Perception of other temperaments:
EJ: EPs perceive EJs as active but too restless and nervous, slightly annoying due to a lack of sense of spontaneity.
IP: EPs perceive IPs as pleasantly flexible and responsive to their initiatives, sometimes too unpredictable but for that very reason never boring.
IJ: EPs perceive IJs as too predictable and boring, too unwilling to do things on the spur of the moment.

---

Quote:

---

EJ temperament


The EJ temperament, or linear-assertive temperament, was identified by Viktor DarkAngelFireWolf69 and includes the four rational extroverts (one in each quadra): ESE, EIE, LIE, and LSE. Each of these types is also dynamic.


Typical characteristics:
proactive
restless
difficult to relax unless tired
walk tends to be quick-paced and "purposeful", as well as stiff
"calmly energetic" with few intense variations in the level of energy during the day
inclined to fidget when forced to remain inactive for long periods
EJs are both dynamic and rational, so they see reality as in continuous, gradual, often imperceptible change. At the same time, an EJ has his own views of what reality "should" be. This inclines him to be quick to take action, normally using his leading function, in order to make sure things will remain, or become, as they should be, before change can get too far.


As extroverts, EJs tend to feel that it is up to them to initiate contacts with other people, whether in the context of establishing or maintaining a relationship. They will not necessarily act on that, though, and sometimes wish others would take over this role.


Perception of other temperaments:
EP: EJs see EPs as unpredictable and moody, and therefore a bit irritating, but also as extremely energetic once they do focus on doing something, as well as the source of initiatives that may be worthwhile.
IP: EJs see IP as unpredictable, moody, as well as too passive and unreliable, especially if they are required to show initiative or even reciprocity.
IJ: EJs see IJs as solid, reliable, and reassuringly predictable, and usually not inclined towards being the first to take the initiative in taking action.

---

People's first impression of me never factored on my self-typings though, because they indeed vary a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LuckyOne

SLE doesn't fit because of it's :Ni: usage, and EIE doesn't fit because of both :Si: (as you can see mine is fine) and it's general attitude towards logic.

---

You actually seem pretty good at describing yourself, could you explain why this is the case? I agree LIE is unlikely, too much Fe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehotelambush

You actually seem pretty good at describing yourself, could you explain why this is the case? I agree LIE is unlikely, too much Fe.

---

Well this is what Reining has to say on SLE's :Ni::

Quote:

---

Function #4- subjective intuition (:Ni:): “I want the world to be in harmony and beautiful. I want to feel good so do something”. A Zhukov’s thirst for inner peace is the biggest than any others’. He does not know how to manage his own feelings. He needs external influence to have a change of mood. Therefore he resorts to common means of changing the mood: alcohol, drugs. Some of them get into verbal fights. This is a very interesting channel of suggestion because this type is usually at the top and we run into them in burocratic structures. They are difficult to be around because they have hard time managing their moods and emotions, they are unpredictable.

---

Which doesn't fit reality except for the bolded part (and even then it's something that's more entertaining than serious to me, which I don't expect everyone to understand), but not nearly as ill fitting as his description of what the actual 4th function entails:

Quote:

---

Function number four.
Suggestive function. The principle of "place assessment". Motives. "I want to"

This is a function through which a suggestion might be done most easily. In the fourth function area an individual is open for external influences. Depending on which type the person belongs to; different outer signals have more or less impact on him or her. It is often thought (often confirmed at public hypnosis sessions) that 7 to 10 % of people yield to hypnosis while others do not. I believe that it is just not so. Each person is subject to suggestive psychotherapy. The problem is that the techniques of trance induction used at public sessions work effectively only with one or two out of sixteen types, the rest of the audience does not respond.
While the first function is about "things I have sufficient knowledge about", the fourth function is about "what other people know". Here a person is prone to be guided by others, to lean on external authority. In practice of suggestive psychotherapy and hypnosis a concept of rapport is used: the concept of connection between the hypnotist and the object of hypnosis. Each type has a 'built-in' rapport with the external world. This is the core of the fourth function. Here the person is most gullible and open for external information, he takes it in without discernment.
Each IM type has an area open for suggestion, so everyone has this breach for gullibility. And I believe it would be good for people who are, so to speak, interested in inner their mechanics, to know about this feature of their type. It is useful to know what happens when the external world somehow manipulates you. It is good to be on guard be able to detect, recognize and correct such influences, it does not mean you are on defense (in my opinion, it is not good to be on defense from the external world); it means that your behavior is conscious.
Good knowledge of one's fourth function is very important from the point of view of increase of one's level of awareness. As a rule, in this area people are hypochondriacal. Strange things happen here. For example, other people know whether I am ill or healthy. Others tell me whether I am in love or not. In this sphere a person is not discerning. As a rule he/she simply does not pay attention to a suggestion. It might be recognized later, when experiencing a new quality of state. Usually it is not recognized at all. However, when I know this trait of my personality, I have a chance to discern an attempt to manipulate me at an earlier stage. And as soon as the attempt is discerned, it is not unconscious any more. Then I am in control, allowing or blocking certain influences. It is a very interesting research – learning about the areas where I am open, hypochondriacal or unprotected. To begin with when exposed to certain influences pay attention to your automatisms.
Usually people are unaware of the fourth function, and are prone to create situations where 'programming' occurs. Often such behavior appears to be a process of collecting of strategies, estimations, and information processing techniques. And in the same area uneasiness and anxiety are frequent. Even gross flattery and obvious disinformation presented through the channels of the fourth function have good chances to pass without criticism.
If the active set of stereotypes and habitual reactions in this sphere is extensive enough, the person may look rather effective in corresponding area. Unlike the situation with the second function, this efficiency is discrete – when facing unusual, non-standard environment all efficiency may disappear.
The subject matter of the fourth function is often used as the criteria for assessing a place, for example: “I am loved here, so the place is good ” (Maxim). Here person's motivation ("I want to") is detected: “I want to be loved”.
The third and fourth functions affect the choice of the social niche. As a rule, we look for a place in a society where these functions would be protected in one way or another. It happens instinctively.
Why do I need to know the fourth function of the type? The better I know the programming channels, the less I am exposed to external influences. It is a challenge for everyone with any IM type.

---

Thing is :Ni: is most definitely not the channel through which I can be suggestible because information pertaining this function is something I provide others with, and not the opposite, I'm hardly if ever unaware of it, don't fret about it, and I don't think anyone would classify any circle I'm part of as a :Ni: heavy environment. It's a very private thing for me actually, I only discuss it online and even then only to a certain extent for several reasons. If there's anything I'm totally comfortable with and confident about is http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...smilies/Ni.gif.

Another thing that doesn't fit SLE at all is :Si::

Quote:

---

Function #-1– subjective sensoring (:Si:): health is in the area of ignoring. A Zhukov has a "farmer's attitude" in health issues: "I shall plough until I drop dead in my furrow." When he does get sick having spent all his strength in feverish activity) he allows others to take care of them. Only when they are burnt out they might agree to take some time off at a resort or a hospital. People of this type should remember this because people are not indestructible; they are not sources of endless energy. However, they should not stay away from work completely. A Zhukov needs to learn to control this area of life. Not all of them are capable of doing that.
A Zhukov is not a picky eater: he expects food to be plentiful and filling, it should not be some choice food, but it should be esthetically pleasing.

---

This is like, the opposite of my attitude towards health and food, I'm super aware of my resources and I protect them fiercely, I'm also quie particular and demanding when it comes to what I consume.

As for EIE, these are both really off base, but specially the bolded:

Quote:

---

Function #4(suggestible) - subjective logic (:Ti:): a good place is where I understand everything. A Hamlet may accept things because they sound logical. A Hamlet and a Hugo are the two types who enjoy the most attending lectures, meetings, discussions, etc. (see description of a Hugo). The key thing here is that they need a structure and they need to be able to understand what’s going on. They accept other people’s explanation of how everything works and what is right and wrong. A good place is the place where I understand everything, where things have been explained to me and I understood. A Hamlet is open for outside influences through explanations.

Function #-4- objective logic (:Te:): the zone of fears. “To be or not to be?” – this is a Hamlet’s classical question. Alas, it is necessary to make a decision! What is going to happen after I make a decision? Nobody knows, and this is frightening... When a choice is made there is freedom for creativity. It is a purely a hamletian problem – the fear of realization, of definiteness, irreversibility of a made decision. Even if it is clear that it is absolutely necessary to move (to put things in order; to make a legal implementation), but somehow there is never enough time.
A Hamlet has to make efforts to feel more or less confidently in the area where decision-making is a necessity. A Hamlet never puts other people's things in order and hardly ever organizes his/her own belongings.
NB! People of this type are susceptible to illness in the upper air passages.

---

If anything I'm way too suspicious and skeptical about information I do not find out or come across myself, and I hate when people try to feed me their own conclusions whenever I ask them direct questions (not opinions). Then there's the fact that I make decisions too early on. I might change them later on, sometimes more than once and even last minute if I get new reliable facts or a strong intuition, but I don't put off on picking an option and I'm always at least 90% confident about the one I choose at the time. Even with typing all these years of MBTI and more recently Socionics, I absolutely hate not having a type to call my own, it's the first time ever I don't have one in my profile.