If someone is chirpy, are they more likely to be INFj? If someone is playful in a "lighter" way, are they more likely to be INFj than someone who is playful in a more physical or aggressive way? Are INFjs less intense than ISFjs?
Printable View
If someone is chirpy, are they more likely to be INFj? If someone is playful in a "lighter" way, are they more likely to be INFj than someone who is playful in a more physical or aggressive way? Are INFjs less intense than ISFjs?
I have always seen INFjs as rather serious people rather than someone chirpy and playful.
What about a Ne subtype? I see INFjs as being serious overall, but I'm trying to determine the differences between INFjs and ISFjs. I would tend to think that a Ne/Si type would somehow be... softer?... than ISFjs typically are.
Yes, that's right. I could even say that EII is more feminine and ESI more masculine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joy
ISFj Fi subtype people may be quite "soft," almost ISFp-like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joy
ISFjs like hard facts and reputable knowledge. INFjs are the look-alike type for INTj. They tend to have interests that in some ways are similar to INTj...maybe more speculative, Ne-like. Also, ISFjs take the lead more in relationships; INFjs may be more reclusive.
There is someone I know who I think is INFj. She has read the ISFj and INFj (as well as ENFp, ESFp, and INFp) descriptions and said that she related most strongly to the ISFj description. She said she had problems with the INFj description (I have to admit it doesn't sound much like her and the ISFj description does) and the ESFp and ENFp descriptions didn't fit at all... and that INFp is out of the question (she said the same of ISFp when she read it a while back). :lol:
The thing is, her demeanor is so much more... light hearted... than other ISFjs I know. At their core, none of the IxFjs I know can be called "light hearted" by any means, but the confirmed ISFjs present themselves as being more "serious" than she does. Of the two confirmed ISFjs that I know quite well, one of them doesn't joke much and one has a very Se style of humor (though most people never see it). The latter ISFj seems to see this individual as being frivolous and somewhat... unpredictable?
I've considered that the confirmed ISFjs are both Se subtypes (though I wouldn't know why one is so much quieter than the other... she's got a lot of health problems and seems to worry excessively, even for an ISFj :o) and that this individual is a Fi subtype.
My ISFj brother can be pretty light-hearted when he's in a good mood. I think it just depends on the person. ISFjs might tend to be more serious than other types, but there's still room for a variety of particular dispositions.
If she's read both and thinks she's ISFj, and you think she fits the ISFj descriptions best, that would point toward ISFj more than her being less serious than the average ISFj would point away from ISFj.
This should be written in bold at the top of every description! How often do people get hung up on one or two details in a description and ignore the overall gist of it? *sigh*Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana
Good to remember (if I'm not mistaken)
INFj -> positivist
ISFj -> negativist
INFj is more likely to encourage others and be optimistic and try to solve problems by creating something new.
ISFj is more likely to need encouragement and be pessimistic and try to solve problems by getting rid of something which annoys them.
negativist/positivist doesn't really mean pessimistic/optimistic, but rather focusing on the negative/positive.Quote:
Originally Posted by XoX
A Negativist would be usually better at problem-solving than a Positivist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngelFireWolf69
Hmm..be more specific in how our positions exactly differ? It seems you said pretty much the same thing with different wording.Quote:
Originally Posted by machintruc
a pessimistic negativist focuses on PROBLEMS
an optimistic negativist focuses on SOLUTIONS
Very good, very good explanation. I think it should be added to the "official" negativist-positivist descriptionQuote:
Originally Posted by Diana
I can see how you CAN be. But I claimed it is more LIKELY that it is the way I put it. Are you saying that negativist is more LIKELY to be optimistic and positivist is more LIKELY to be pessimistic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana
hmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana
hmm. some INFjs are pretty obsessed about aesthetics because of Si hidden agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starfall
Some INFjs I know are obsessed about aesthetics, but don't generally seem to really be able to pull it off. Like they'll have some piece of clothing and they will think it's The Thing, but it'll look kind of funny on them. But don't tell them! They can't handle the truth!
Please, INFjs of the world, that was (partially) in jest, so don't get upset. :)
Good callQuote:
Originally Posted by machintruc
(Which is generally why I like EIIs, especially EII > ESI. ESI's can give off that angry grandmother / angry mother/ the Matriarch / controlling old hag vibe that, of course, does not sit well with me)
Not a useful form of reasoning. Look at the above. I am an LII and I fuss about people's rooms and living conditions, and like an EII, I tend to dress professionally and with care, when I am going to be out and about. But even when i'm at home, looking good is nice. Si HA.Quote:
I noticed that ISFj's tend to care much more about their physical appearance than an INFj would.
S types do, 'generally', seem to be more aware of appearance.
Fi subtypes (both varieties) are very tight-lipped, even in social circumstances. Ne subtypes are warmer, tend to be more talkative, like discussing philosophy, music, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joy
It depends on how natural it seems for her. Negativists can try desperately at times to look on the bright side, but it always seems manufactured.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joy
This could explain how Pos/Neg really works in duality, especially as for how Negativists help Positivists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana
My understanding is that positivists tend to ignore problems, whereas Negativists tend to over-emphasize them. (Although that should naturally lead to pessimism/optimism. It does apply IME. Depressed INTps >> depressed ESFjs.) So each helps the other see the other side of things, the one they are ignoring.
As for pessimistic Positivists, IME:
Pessimistic ENTp: "Yeah, it sucks that I'm a total slacker and don't know what I'm going to do with my life, I really should do something about it, shouldn't I?"
Pessimistic ESFj: "No really, don't worry about me, everything is fine. I'll take care of it." or "Even though he has Alzheimer's, he can be so lucid sometimes; it makes me think he is still in there somewhere. I can't give up hope."
This is pretty close to what I think. But I'm unsure of is how to bind far-sighted vs careless dichotomy into this. As I would think far-sighted people tend to focus on problems more than careless people. So how would a positivist far-sighted person differ from negativist careless person?Quote:
Originally Posted by thehotelambush
Real world observations of INFj vs. ISFj
These distinctions are probably well-known and very common-sensical deductions based on the theory, but since they ARE real world validations, may be useful to share - i.e., helpful to some who, e.g., are on the fence about their type:
#1) ISFjs have MUCH more innate physical energy than I (INFj-Ne) do, to get up and work on tasks - especially repetitive mundane ones, like doing the dishes. I feel the need to be emotionally or intellectually stimulated quite a bit while in the process to be able to keep my energy up. And the focus of my attention would not be wholly on task, then. They have more physical endurance than I - i.e., when the pace is slower and more deliberate, steady. And so, may appear to be more patient with tasks - impatient with concepts. I'm the opposite.
#2) They exhibit a stubbornness w.r.t. taking action in a way that I don't (my stubbornness is ... umm, different). :P And don't like to be rushed and may even slow down if you push them (whereas an INFj might cave into pressure to rush more).
#3) They are able to be more forgiving of unpleasantries in their environment than I - e.g., if someone sat between us and were all hot and sweaty, with beads pouring down their forehead, I'm apt to be instinctively disgusted and try to block this from my awareness, whereas the ISFjs wouldn't seem to mind at all (i.e., would be the normals ones, here!). Also, some ISFjs may have a fascination with the dark and macabre for some reason, able to tolerate watching violent horror films - even enjoy them - whereas a typical INFj would cringe at such scenes.
#4) No offense, but in discussions with them I often feel like they just aren't as naturally adept nor predisposed to automatically perceiving other ways of looking at a situation as I am. And if I do share other view(s), they are often either suspicious and express cynical doubt, or don't even want to consider it. (But once in a while, they may listen to the idea, and sometimes maybe agree ... even less often, may like the idea.)
#5) I greatly admire the way in which they routinely express their loyalty to those they care about with consistent actions. By comparison, I could seem neglectful of those I care about, even when I care deeply. That is, I do not express it much, especially not consistently and in practical ways, like ISFj automatically does. For example, I admire how one ISFj I know is so instinctively moved to action to care for, say, an ill neighbor, but being able to summon the energy to go over and clean her house, and look after her health and comfort for a few hours. And then, do this several days a week! This is so wonderful to me, because their values aren't just left in the abstract realm anymore, as they often are for me. No, another can benefit in the here and now from such kindness. Whereas an INFj may seem to pounce on minor opportunities to assist with short-term tasks ... IF the fact that help is needed actually came into their awareness ... they may not be able to sustain such physical efforts AS easily and efficiently as your average ISFj. Perhaps more developed INFjs can do these things.
#6) Nevertheless, (this may now initially sound contradictory) I am more apt to get restless if I just sit in one position for a long period of time if my thoughts and/or emotions are not sufficiently stimulated. I'd want to take in - observe - MORE new experiences (to stimulate my intuition, I guess), whereas the ISFj has a greater capacity to, say, sit home and watch football all day, or spend long hours crocheting a blanket. Perhaps other INFjs may agree with me that we seem to desire more perceptual variety over time so that our intuition is stimulated (unless, of course, we're having a quiet spiritual retreat in the woods or something ... but here, our intuition is probably already engaged in a special way ...)
#7) Before I do something, such as decorate a page in a scrapbook, my typical inclination is to plan out everything in advance. I want to have a final vision in mind of the end result before I start. It need not be crisp, i.e., can allow SOME improvisation, but I need to form a general idea in my head first. And, I want some ideas of how I'm going to perform various critical steps along the way ... some sense of methods, prethought out. Not so with the ISFj, it seems. They just "do" more ... with not so much thought towards a longterm goal. When they do need to consider meeting a specific longterm goal, they definitely seem to want their dual's input to help them feel secure about the steps along the way, the data and methods to know everything will be all right (e.g., if an ISFj is doing some data migration project they are responsible for, NOW they must be concerned about an end result and will want to know EVERY step of the way, and feel nervous about the whole thing coming together even when they have a solid plan and know all the concrete details ... I'm thinking maybe their dual's strengths eases their own uncertainties on an occasion like this.) The next #8 and #9 are related points ...
#8) INFjs seem way too perfectionistic to ISFjs, who may tell them not to worry so much about refining their work ... which is "often overdone with too much time and energy expended" to the ISFj. But the INFj will feel sad if their work doesn't meet their ideas in mind and consider it to be slop if they knew they could've done better because it didn't measure up to their inner vision. The ISFj is more pragmatic - "if it works, great. Now let's move on." I would rather the ISFj just let me be and come back when I'm done than harp on me during the process to "not worry so much" ... and "stop" ...
#9) ISFjs are happier with the status quo ... as long as things are secure and comfy, etc. ... whereas an INFj is more stimulated by prospects of innovation for the sake of improvement, efficiency (like INTj) and the conceptually imaginative opportunities available in such scenarios. This has been a point of conflict between myself and two different ISFjs in the past, repeatedly. I wanted change when they did not and were content - whether it was how we spent leisure time together or what was considered to be at an acceptable status in a work environment.
#10) ISFjs are more apt to privately express a clear "us vs. them" attitude in immediate situations - more than INFj's collective instinct to try to understand where everyone is coming from and recognize that "we're all humans on the same playing field, so we may as well work together and have as a pleasant experience for everyone as possible" ...
#11) Some ISFjs seem amused by themes of revenge, and may even seek it - something I can't (easily?) relate to.
#12) The willpower of ISFjs indeed is much more pronounced. I've been lectured by ISFjs in the past on the need to be more assertive, and some ISFjs have regularly asked me to do things requiring a lots of active assertion that took me wayyyy outside my comfort zone. It's like, INFj is conscientious in these situations and feels more vulnerable in ways that do not even occur to the ISFj.
#13) ISFj is more apt to appear stoic and tranquil, even lethargic - inactive yet present. INFj is more apt to appear tightly wound on the inside and high-strung, or else uninvolved - inactive and even somehow, strangely disappearing ... :wink: (i.e., blending in with surroundings).
Yes, what you said makes perfect sense. ISFj is simply from a quadra that values :Se: a lot more than your quadra does.
ISFjs annoy me though. I really do not get along with them at all. They need to stop looking so damn constipated all the time and lighten up.
LMFAO. Yes, it's true. My mom looks constipated a lot. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves
ISFjs are generally slightly more mesomorphic/endomorphic than INFjs
I'm not sure how to compare the ISFj and INFj in terms of being pushovers. I find ISFj's tend to be more so pushovers, for want of a word, at work, they try to work hard and make a point of trying not to complain, hoping people will notice and appreciate them trying to work hard, and they try to be somewhat unobtrusive in a general social gathering.Quote:
Originally Posted by UDP
They're not really push overs at home however, and will talk about where they've seen themselves been wronged to to friends. And in all situations they tend to accumulate things and then complain about them or act in a vengeful way later.
INFj's i've known tend to go with the flow more. If they don't like someone they tend to ignore or avoid them, rather than express their unhappyness through attempts for sympathy and direct emotional attack in their personal life like some ISFj's.
I find INFj's are more easier to forgive you, and ISFj's can hold grudges for longer. But you're more likely to know an ISFj is annoyed.
Just my observations.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Also, maybe it depends on the context. I think INFJs have a better idea of what is "profitable/beneficial" (being intuiters), so they may come across as more head strong in discussions about what to implement.
ISFJs, OTOH, have a better idea of how to actually get something done (and stick to it), so they may come across as more head strong in the actual implementation.
Then search for new potential relationship. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by The Greeter
I definitely search for loyalty.
It's easy to cut someone out and push someone away - but someone who can and wants to stick around? That's harder, for me, to find.
Intimacy and closeness is also nice, but that lone is kind of.... only so much.
You're not alone, my friend. But it's probably harder for you, as an extrovert, since you need people more than I (or some of us) do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryu
Perhaps loyalty is not the best term, since I do think that closeness entails a strong loyalty, and even I cannot work without loyalty in a relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryu
It's just that loyalty is not necessarily "close", but it is solid.
I suppose what I'm trying to establish is the scope between the ENTj and ESTj, and their respective approaches in building relationships. I find ENTjs are more likely to expand their field, where as ESTjs tend to keep a closed circle--reaching out from time to time. And, their duals complement their approaches by doing the opposite.
How would you do it? Dichotomies that state what trait one has in contrast to the other, akin to "in control/not in control", or "is focused on social network/is focused on humanitarian efforts" or whatever.
.
They were just examples of the sorts of dichotomies I was looking for, since I don't really care for Reinin or unclear Socionics dichotomies (like Judicious/Decisive, which is reasonably difficult to spot at-a-glance, or during a snap-typing).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
uhh...lots of different ways.
Just by overall behavior, EIIs tend to be the more dreamy types, whereas ESIs are far more focused (IP vs IJ temperament). Also a big difference between having :Ne: in the creative block for the EII, vs a PoLR for the ESI. One is always dreaming or thinking about the unknown or what could be, whereas the other is focused with laser precision on the right now and is actually more terrified of the unknown, or that they don't know something.
.
Greater inclination towards ideas and concepts? Let's be a little less vague, please.
I find the biggest differences to be in moments of conflict. ESIs are more agressive and combative, while EIIs will be passive-agressive or just plain passive, looking very uncomfortable. ESIs are more likely to be outspoken. ESIs often come across as intense, while EIIs can be somewhat whimsical.
Well frankly I don't know what the fuck you're talking about, I was hoping you'd expand on your impression instead of assuming that everyone could accurately interpret your breathtakingly wide-sweeping statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
Oops sorry, forget that whole post. Somehow I saw IEI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
ESI tend to be more self-assured and assertive, but still naturally friendly and conflict avoiding. I like to think of them as a person with a strong outer shell protecting a sensitive internal world. Very up front about how they feel when impassioned. Not likely to back down when they feel strongly about something. They are realists who see the harsh world for what it is but try to preserve sanity and morality where they can.
EII are more accepting and passive, although they can be very passive-aggressive. They're more sensitive inside and out. I'd also say they're more idealistic in the sense that they might idealize world peace, have a fluffy view of humanity, or something of the like. They have a more innocent and humanitarian approach to the world.
Okay, ESI vs EII from me, take 2.
ESIs have strong moral judgment systems. Something is either right or wrong, your behavior is good or bad, and there's very little middle ground. Try to argue with an ESI that the way they feel about something is 'wrong' and you're not likely to get very far. EIIs on the other hand seem to give moral equivalence to just about everything. An EII is far less likely to judge you, and no matter how bad or 'wrong' a particular behavior might be, there's always some way in which it's justified with them. A lot of EII type descriptions suggest that EIIs can very easily fall into bad or abusive relationships, and this is why.
On polr :Ne: for the ESI. Sensory IJ types like to believe that they know everything that they need to know and that everything is under control. When they realize they don't know something or everything is not under control, this makes them extremely irritated. They might even go on a rampage. Example with my wife. We've been having a minor leak issue and we thought we had it fixed. Some very strong storms came through recently and the leak reappeared. My reaction: A calm and collected, hmmmmm, must be a minor secondary leakage source from elsewhere. Will call someone. My wife: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrgggggggggggghh WTF is it? We need to sell this damned house! :mad: fiiiiiiiiixxxx iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittttt!!! :mad::mad: (sell the house, for a minor roof leak issue? lol :lol: ) An EII with polr :Se: is maybe less likely to notice that there was even a leak in the first place, or if they did they might not even care.
FTR, ESI descriptions say the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
MBTI ones or Socionics? Links?Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeroffs
What he said. Thats the best i could come up with, I wouldlike to add INFjs come off less wimsical in conflict situations then completely passive often taking a beating, whereas ISFjs are much more prepared for conflicts as they sense them coming along and when they do they mobilize and respond and can hold their own.Quote:
Originally Posted by stanprollyright
Socionics... I can't find it.. What I might be remembering is this thread actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
Basically that ESIs might subject themselves to less-than-ideal relationships because they are prone to self-sacrifice and devotion.
But doesnt that thread say that ESIs are prone to having others take advantage of them? Thats also true for EIIs.
Oh ok, yeah that I'd agree with. I don't think ESIs will tolerate outright 'abusive' relationships like EIIs seem to be able to though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeroffs
Yeah it does, and yeah I'd say it's true for both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhon
yeah i think thats generally trueQuote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
Lol, what does that say about LxEs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeroffs
I always thought :Fi: dominants were easy to take advantage of because they expect others to use :Te:. It might mean that LxEs are good at taking advantage of people, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeroffs
'Take advantage of' is pretty generic terminology because all types can be taken advantage of and manipulated, just in different ways.
once they are in it yes. but ESI's are pretty picky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeroffs
I mostly agree, but I think in some cases ESI feel like they need a relationship and will settle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarno
But we were talking about Fi dominants being easily used in relationships, because of their desire to help in practical ways which is what I meant, that Te domiants may use others in relationships in this way, though I am not Te dominant so its hard to say. In any case, if that the case it be, then Fi domiants would learn from Te dominants how to "take advantage of others"(as I put it) themselves and how to defend their interests in this domain, since that tends to be the effect of dualization.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
ESI's seem more rigid and uncompromising while EII's seem more flexible and understanding. ESI's are more aggressive and confrontational where EII's are more passive and considered. spose i see it this way since ESI is my conflict. basically the most obvious difference lies in the polr of each.
.
I'd say ESIs are equally likely to stay in abusive relationships, but often it's a different type of abuse.
ESIs can use :Se: to keep on "pushing" for a relationship with people that aren't very interested in them, which might be using them for sex, money, company, etc. without giving anything (at the very least emotional) in return - but will never stand being verbally or physically assaulted / abused.
OTOH I see EIIs as being more likely to let these type of relations drift to the point of no return - they just stop caring about that person; yet they're more likely to stand direct physical or verbal abuse.
My impression (based on a tiny sample and likely insignificant):
EIIs stay in bad or abusive relationships because they think it may get better.
ESIs stay in bad or abusive relationships because they think it may be worse without it.
Basically the difference is in Fi+ maximizing good relations vs Fi- minimizing bad relations. In a good situation, the former would focus on other promising relationships, whereas the latter would avoid or break off a bad one directly. It goes wrong if the EII is too focused on potential to see its improbability or an ESI is too focused on avoiding something worse - in other words, doesn't see any better alternative.
This may also imply EII is more likely to tolerate obviously bad aspects of relationship, whereas ESI would find it easier to accept lack of good ones - like FDG describes.
No. EII stay in "bad" relationships because they are always trying to "teach" and instruct the person to change somehow, whether that's in their habits or their behavior. We can get out of a relationship too you know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
ESI stay in bad relationships because they feel that they can't do better.
You just said exactly what she said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
My understanding is that it's a commitment thing. I understand that ESIs will work extremely hard for people important to them. In my mother's case, it was for my sake until Dad started putting her down too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
IOW nothing in this thread seems inaccurate.
I think "thinking things can GET better" is different from "working on things." Those two things are not the same to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thanks Arthur
I just think it's like what whatshisface said, that ESIs are combative and love to fight and argue (I mean look at Ashton, he's this way, he admits he's this way and he's ENTj and ISFj is his dual so it makes sense) Birds of a feather debuff together. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, I value Se too after all but ehh I don't particularly care for the gamma way of arguing.
INFj on contrast isn't like that, they are just innately less sociopathic and if somebody is in true pain they will let up on them. They may still hurt somebody but probably feel guilty about doing so easier. This may sound stereotypical but all se polrs HATE fighting, it's just true. I'm not saying they are weak pussies cuz of that, I wouldn't think that, compassion is a strength but it's still true that they just hate fighting, infjs and infjs are always like this and sometimes they can be insecure about that but it's still true that they are like that. lol.
They BOTH are very humanitarian-like equally though. They both are just really like that or at the very least their egos think they are like that, which leads to some interesting personality conflicts that they get themselves into. They both are equally 'fuzzy' and 'concrete' with that human social networking shit. That's no way to differentiate them based on that criteria. They both tend to be quite social and like to be around other people despite all the moral judgements and criticisms they constantly dish out, and are never afraid to dish out. They both are highly self-confident in this area. And I'm usually their targets!!!
LOL, very true for my sister!Quote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
Thanks that was a helpful example! I'm not that great at identifying gammas yet...
Lol, that sounds like my LSE friend. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
XD Me: A leak? Oh yeah, that's why I've been avoiding walking under it the past couple of days.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevENTj
*bump*
What do people mostly agree on as the difference?
I do not agree with a lot of these thing; one is that I have enough energy to do routine things like washing the dishes, what I don't have energy for is shopping, grocery shopping, due to sensory overload and inability to manage sensory data.
bumping this for a specific question.
how to go about recognizing these types when their subtypes don't coincide with the type profiles? what i mean is the ESI and EII type descriptions seem to be describing the Sensing Subtype of ISFj (Se-ISFj; decisive, pragmatic, confident doer, a workhorse) and the Ethical Subtype of INFj (Fi-INFj; kind, yielding, concerned for harmony in relations, sensitive psychologist). these two type + subtype combinations are easy to spot - they correspond the greatest to the type stereotypes. But what about the other two subtypes? it is said that Fi-ESIs are softer and get confused for IEIs because they have accentuated Ni hidden agenda and can be just as spacey and languid, while the intuitive subtype Ne-EII isn't as obsessed with harmony in relations and can be abrasive and harsh almost like an LSE. so how to recognize them?
Yeah I'm like that. Its hard to tell and you can't until you get closer to them. The ne se difference is still the only way to tell its just harder to see. Throw in dcnh subtypes and it gets even harder because there are dominant eii's and esi's that are in no way like that. *when are they gonna add articles on the dcnh.
I cannot do routine things like dishes unless I'm reminded but shopping is easy for me. I always forget to do the important routine stuff. Arg ! So inneficient..Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
Then we're duals ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by carrina
:Se: in ISFjs manifests as creativity with their appearance, with methods of acquiring money and influence and applying volitional pressure on others. They connect with others via their external form.
INFjs are not nearly as creative with external forms and become uncomfortable in situations where they have to apply volitional pressure. However :Ne: lets them manipulate ideas and potential prospects as a means to connect with others.
I think those subtype descriptions are not good because I've observed all kinds of attitude I mean external attitude differences within each type. This has a lot to do with life experiences. I'm dualized and I see EII as quite hash forceful defensive over the top top reactive and domineering. I'm soo much more calm but put me in a roo. With a harsh SLI who nearly ignores my external emotions as they curse at me and you can see a whole other side of me emerge and one who is defiant and not as calm as I would rather be, but ive learned that the best defense against those kinds of people is to walk away and leave. I have and i can maintain my internal peace well thay way.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeves
ISFj- Tend to helping people's immediate needs. Day to day matters. (mom, nurse)
INFj- Tend to helping people in the long run. Big picture matters. (sage, gandhi)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeves
This has not been my experience with ESI-Fis. Nor do I identify with that description of Se subtype. (I'm definitely Se subtype but for various other reasons). /my two cents.
My ESI cousin has an extremely abrasive mother in law. While she puts on a calm front and ignores her sherades in public and voices her complaints to her husband a lot she maintains a civil facade. I watch her mother in laws attitude and wonder what I would do in her case and probably the same things like making sure that she's invited to the parties and sees the grand kids but I would probably not complain as much as she because I would accept her for what she is and that builds this emotional front for me that doesn't let what they do and say get to me so I don't complain. I would tactfully suggest a world view understanding of ideas to get a feel for how she thinks and feels and once I make out who she is I would stop and accept her and play on the positive things and try not to bring up the negative things whereas my cousin ignores evetything when something is not positive. She's much more apt to being apathetic than i am. I want to LIVE with vibrant warmness and eh brush the other stuff aside. We both strongly care about relationships and morals I just look more fun and infantile fragile and soft she looks like an adult woman always wearing makeup and nice almost business casual attire. I wear jeans but something what a teen would still wear and a pair of running shoes just in case I need to get out for fun with my bf. I don't think I've ever seen her in clothes ready to go play in the mud lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
I do not look at the objective perameters of why a prrson is the way they are. By objective perameters I mean that they are bitter because of their upbringing or because of their society. I ask that persons or individuals own opinions about things like "how do you feel about asian people" and when I get a sense of their views I then figure "ok, racist prejudice and now we're not going to talk about asian people even though I like Asian people fine , but you won't hear of that!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
I understand them naturally and don't question whether what they believe in is right or wrong in the again external perameters way which is right and wrong according to something like the...the times (again society), the culture of the times. I don't interfere with arguments. I see or I feel where they come from and I leave it alone. You and I are very different in the way that we look at human interaction and morals. To me morals is not set in stone abiding by rules of right and wrong (which is objective ethics) and the foundation of my moral outlook is love and kindnes, it's not based on right and wrongs of ethics that are based on society or what society dictates as in what culture teaches us or what our mother teaches us. You're constantly trying to find an angel in which to relate to me. This is in a sense trying to bring yourself in one society with me. Mediayors resolve conflicts betwrrn people to bring everyone inyo one. I'm not such a person as I believe that individuality will be losy in this manner of social agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
By trying to resolve issues between people you are mediating theregore you use your capabilities as a mediator as THE MEDIATOR (sei)..
I added some things to my last post please reread. You have to look at what you're trying to do in society and here as I presume always you mediate and befriend to resolve conflict which is what ILE need : the Mediator as they often have trouble in their relationships. When you or I or anyone is honest to themselves about who they are and what they do they can tell their type.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Basing things on personal comfort, needing enviornment to be positive and non confrontations ( aka emotivis dichotomy) and mediatinh. That's what I see and feel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Hi Nessie, I just want to interject here. I was reading this for EII differences with ESI and have only ever seen this one conversation between you and @Maritsa, here. Just so you don't feel too picked upon: I also, as IEE, notice when other people say they are my type, and when I get a sense of their personality from what they write here and it does not feel like my identical at all, I also start making comparisons and noticing particularly the differences, and try to figure out why - which usually leads me to what type I think they are instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Your posts in this thread do not make a type jump out at me, but I would say (and IEEs can make pretty accurate snap judgments on these things) that you are not an ESI, for sure. But could be SEI! Oh, boy, as soon as I get on a mystery like this it stays on my mind till I figure it out. I could see you being EII, too, however: Maritsa questioning it makes me think there might be something up with that. I should tell you that I feel about 100% that Maritsa is EII. I have at least two EIIs I am quite close to IRL, and Maritsa is so much like them. EII is my Mirror, and I relate with all the EIIs I know including Maritsa pretty much exactly like one does with a Mirror.
Now, SEIs are nice, and you are nice. Also SEIs are more flexible than EII, and you do seem to have that flexible, open quality. SEIs I know do NOT like to cut people off, and do not like to make negative judgments about people based on some bad behavior of theirs, whereas, an EII will. And, an EII will certainly cut someone right off who has offended them. (Although, many are not aware that an EII will graciously let them back "in" with a sincere apology).
You say here, above, of Maritsa:I see those qualities as the "J" qualities I expect in EII. Realize that the rational/irrational (j/p) differences are a big irritant in relations. So if you are a SEI, you will likely find it a negative and forceful irritant when EII demonstrates her confident rationality.Quote:
"I find you to be a very direct, argumentative, and forceful which really bothers me a bit. I really don't mind you suggesting it but telling me I'm a certain type seems kind of not EII"
I'm not saying I have typed you, Nessie, but I am just wondering if the following describes your interactions with Maritsa, who would be your Benefactor if you were a SEI:
"Relations of Benefit may appear even and conflict free. Usually it is the Benefactor who initiates the contact. Partners can even feel some kind of spiritual connection between them. However, relations last only as long as the Benefactor has something to give and the Beneficiary has need of it. If this major condition is no longer fulfilled, relations enter quite an unpleasant stage of their development. The Beneficiary may begin ignoring the Benefactor completely or they may start to accentuate too many of the Benefactors inability, provoking arguments and quarrels. Finally, when the Benefactor is in a superior position to the Beneficiary, it can work quite well, but not when it is the other way round! "
also this:
"The Beneficiary can see the weakness of the Benefactor, wishing to help their partner to strengthen themselves. Because the strongest point of the Beneficiary is the weak and unconscious point of the Benefactor, the Beneficiary is convinced that they are able to help. However, when the Beneficiary tries to help, the Benefactor usually refuses the help without any good explanation. The Beneficiary usually listens to every word the Benefactor says but there is no feedback, the Benefactor can not hear the Beneficiary. This may be sometimes unpleasant and even irritating for the Beneficiary."
(Personally, I can see you as a Beneficiary in your relating with Maritsa. And its a relationship position I am familiar with, having been married to my Benefactor in the past).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason
I don't recommend typing someone by intertype relationships after you heard them utter 2-3 replies in a conversation. She has a typing thread of her own and EII is the most likely option (VI included).
I agree, I am only suggesting what seems right to me. IEEs are known to size up psychological matters rather quickly, so, that could support my guesses having a good chance to be right. Though I am not feeling solid on it, I do think SEI would be a darn good possibility for Nessie. But my Irrationality will always make me suspend judgment, til its a very, very sure thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agni
I do think this little conversation here represents a lack of meeting of the minds, which says "not Identicals" to me. So since I have known Maritsa here long enough to feel quite, quite sure of her type, I am looking openly for what other type Nessie might be...
I agree with this anf it equates well with the story on me and my ESI cousinQuote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
Well that says a lot nice about you. In the dichtonomies there is one set that hates arguing and fighting. Someone just mentioned it like this week. I don't know which dichtonomy it is, but you and I are both on the side that hates getting into fights!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Oh, dear, this is a flaw here at 16types. Newbies getting harassed. Well some of us have been here long, and others even longer, and get comfortable and just say what we want. Consider there are 16 types and 16 relationship types, so your "just being you", and me just being me, and Maritsa just being Maritsa, etc., etc., is going to be extremely annoying to some of the types. You are hitting some people's polars each time you are truly being "yourself". I think that getting comfortable with your own way of seeing things, as we get to be particularly on this forum where somewhere on this site we get validated just for being ourselves, makes some of us bold in saying what we find irritating. (Maybe particularly those who are not repelled by internet fighting?).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
However, IRL, especially for instance in the workplace, when you really annoy someone by just being you, they keep it inside, and perhaps snipe about you to others behind your back, which is crappy. Here its all on the table, and its interesting to see what types treat you what way, and it can be a good lesson for IRL. (You will think, "he looks like my Conflictor, i think i will be a little cautious here...").
I also was shocked when I first started here how rude some could be. I would pour my heart out over a matter and there woudl be these name- calling posts. Amounting to "You are stupid", except very crudely put. Very unlike anyone I deal with IRL. I would have to remind myself that most people were nice, or helpful, and it was just a few rude ones. I am sure that is the case with you. (And later I reminded myself something I learned about rude people. They are scared...).
But also those not trying to be rude can be rude when they are hitting a sensitive side. And we all have sensitive sides. And a Rational being so sure of themselves can easily offend an Irrational.
That's nice! Well, I learned the hard way here, as a person who does not like fighting, that I can make some people fighting mad when I say, "I don't think you are my Identical! Here is all the reasons why!" :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Its a short clipped way that Rationals have. My LSE-ESTJ brother is an Activity relationship with me, and we get along great most of the time (particularly something activity related!) but his curt sureness when we are in disagreement at times can really raise my hackles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Like you, I want to get along with everyone and when I am turned off by a person I like to remind myself that there is more there than meets the eye. Knowing types and relationship-types really helps me with that. (And sometimes its not just about type, its also can be some other good psychological reason).
I think you held your own and its good to express when you are irritated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Maritsa is Rational and like other EIIs can be quite solid about their final judgement on an opinion of things. I know from a long close relationship with my EII sis-in-law that when she is sure on something and I tend to disagree, I often find out later she had good reason for her "final judgement" on a thing. Just at the time she cannot always give a persuasive argument for someone to come to her side on a thing, but she sure knows her side.
When I first started here and had experienced some people being hurtfully rude to me, I also noticed some people being horrible to Maritsa. It surprised me because I respect what she says on things. Perhaps easy for me as its natural to respect your Mirror. But I observed, and saw a lot of the ugliness was type-related. Some were her Supervisors. Also, some of it were Irrationals shocked at the "cheek" of a Rational acting like a Rational. There really was a gang-up thing going on against her and it really was unfair, and likely contributed to the fact that I am permanently biased pro-Maritsa!
Don't feel bad. Learn something. It might be type related, and totally normal to feel turned off by certain statements made in a way certain types would make them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Aw. I totally relate to this. I do think she was just trying to state her opinion, and she must not have realized the stress this conversation was putting you under.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Well you are going to find some people here who think she is not EII and will tell you so, for sure. However, please know, people mistype themselves here! And I do see more than one mis-self-typed EII typing here regularly (and IEE!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
And it is a valid thing to notice, that Maritsa and some other EIIs are extremely unlikely to be the same type. I agree! My opinion is Maritsa is a real EII and so if she and another are clearly not Identicals, then the "other" is not IEE.
Thats my opinion. When you self-type and and you are still learning its good to keep an open mind and consider you might be another type that others think you are. At least then you can check out the Reinins on it (but be careful! For example, Maritsa and I noticed she can be a negative Postivist and me a positive Negativist -- because the Reinin labels don't always fit our pre-conceived idea of what those words mean, so you really have to have a good idea what they are trying to say. Also checking the relationships in your life for the different types - that's a big tell for me. I also think if you are considering between and Irrational/Rational there are some big tells with that. In this thread, you are reading like an Irrational (like me), to me!
Aw. I need a break too from a person I have argued with that has stressed me. But I like Maritsa, I have to say. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Again, could be a Rationals way of impatience with discussing a thing that is already decided, in their mind at least. I recently got all bothered by my LSE brother when he did this to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Well, she knows you are not alone on that one! But I just want to validate that its okay to not like the way someone is dealing with you. Like you said, I don't think she was trying to harass you. However, if you feel harassed, you have just learned something about yourself, you don't like to be talked to in a certain way, and that's okay. Don't feel bad about it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Thanks! Now I hope I have not bored you. IEEs can be way too wordy for many. So I have learned here on 16t! :oops: (I think I read where it has to do with how we get weird with Ti).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
:bighug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
That's important to me, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
Well sometimes it all makes more sense after some space.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
God bless you, Nessie!
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessie
I'll be honest, i haven't read your type thread as of this moment, but i was curious, if you had to choose between holographic-panoramic cognitive style vs causal-deterministic cognitive style, which do you think would fit you better? From what I've seen on this page alone, you seem primarily HP. Looking at things from multiple viewpoints, seeing the different sides of a conversation/disagreement, mentally stepping into someone else's shoes, approaching a concept/idea from different angles, etc.
Though, admittedly this idea is part of the static negativist ring, rather than a positivist one, which you seemed to prefer. And I guess some of what you said could fit CD, too. Like seeing why someone might become racist due to causal experiences. Plus, it's not like a type is limited to only one style. Flipping back and forth between HP and CD can also seem quite HPish. ;)
Actually, I guess the most obvious thing is that you pay attention to what's going on inside the person, and see it objectively rather than basing your perceptions on your own personal feelings about them. Very Delta, imo.
I don't see where those typing you as SEI are seeing DA cog style as a primary. You definitely seem way more static than dynamic. I also see a preference for Te, wanting to know what actions you've done or things you've said that led them to think a particular type for you, and not just being willing to accept that they don't feel you are the same as them or just that you remind them of someone they know, giving you nothing objective to consider.
I'm sorry that you have experienced the haranguing. But you mentioned reading some of the forum before posting, so probably weren't too surprised. Anyways, I won't be around much, but Welcome to Delta. :hug:
---
Sorry, I suppose this might have been better posted in your typing thread. If you would prefer I move this to there, let me know and I will do so.
Well, as I said, now that I am on this mystery (Nessie's type) its hard to let it go. So @anndelise, you've got me reading up on Static and Dynamic in order to understand it better. I'll share a bit of what stands out to me (though I have not applied it to Nessie yet!). Nothing too profound yet!
My SLI husband is Dynamic while I am Static (Static/Dynamic is one of the things Duals are always opposite in) and what stood out to me so strongly concerning him is this:
- The stories of Statics usually involve one constant main character.
- The stories of Dynamics usually involve multiple main characters.
SLI wrote a long novel (series of 3 books), unpublished, but much worked-on with his writers group over time, and I read it twice. First online, but I had trouble, so I printed the thick volume it to read more comfortably. And still had trouble! I could not keep proper track of the characters. The one I thought was the "main" would disappear for the longest time, and others would come into focus and recede, and I kept trying to connect them to the main, but it was hard to tell who was "main", because it seemed to change as the first main would disappear for long times. SLI did not quite understand why I saw this a stumbling block. When I read the above on Static/Dynamic it made perfect sense. I am a very "main character" type of writer, and reader, and SLI is Dynamic about this. Also another person here (her name is slipping my mind - Kappa, with the cute hat on in her picture) who is an IEI, in her blog has part of a story she wrote. It also involves multiple well-developed characters. Sure enough, IEI is Dynamic, too.
That part about Static/Dynamic is very clear to me. So Nessie, I don't know if that will ring with you if you have not done a lot of writing.
What I want to understand better is how Static/Dynamic uses language. I do not have much of a grasp on that but I want to look it over the descriptions and consult with my SLI on it. SLI is very into language construction. This is said of Static/Dynamic:
"... The difference between Static and Dynamic speech is analogous to the difference between different kinds of verbs in Russian: Static's speech corresponds to verbs of perfect (certain past) kind ("I have made"), and Dynamic's speech to verbs of imperfect (not certain past) kind ("I did"). In English language Static speech corresponds to simple (Indefinite) tenses and Dynamic to long (Continuous) tenses."
I know my SLI can explain that to me (and it will probably take me some time to get it). SLI has been helping his LSI son who is teaching himself Latin and consults with his Dad for his questions and the two of them can talk hours about tenses and things and I have no idea what they are talking about.
Regarding Statics being only one main character followers as opposed to able to follow multiple characters...
That's like saying that statics can't follow romance stories because those jump between the povs of two main characters.
Worse, is considering that IEE are the psychologist type. This implies the ability to see the client's pov, AND...to help give the client some possible insight into their situation, being able to infer (with sufficient information) what might be going on in the other person's mind/motives/orientations/etc, that might help the client understand the other person easier.
Now, add on things like Family Therapy, Marriage Therapy, and the IEE is having to track more than one person's pov.
Then add in that descriptions of IEE talk about the IEE developing a database of such things, and it becomes pretty clear that IEE, a static type, has no problem following multiple lines/povs of an event/story.
Not to mention that IEEs are capable of not just following their own pov of an event/situation (their storyline), but they are perfectly capable of following other people's storylines of the same events. If a person is incapable of such multi-perspective considerations, then they are not IEE, @Eliza Thomason.
Also, Ne is an abstract element. And it is an object oriented one too. A 4D Ne person would pretty easily be capable of following multiple storylines, and multiple povs.
Add in that IEE are HP cog styles, in which they form their understandings of the world BY bringing together multiple perspectives and multiple angles. Bringing all these together is what helps the HP Ne grasp the essence of the situation, the person, etc. Holographic-Panoramic IS a static style, and it necessarily involves multiple angles/perspectives.
No, not really. I am very fine with that because in a romance, the characters are intertwined. I love multiple character development in a story, or a movie, its awesome. But I want to see the inter-relations more.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
I'm actually excellent at that. In an interaction, I am receiving and filing away info and integrating it with my understanding and experience of psychological motives, and all kinds of other things, like type. I am adjusting my responses and my content for the particular person (and for where my moral compass directs). I have a large databases always open for new additions for everyone I know and start new "files" for new folks continually! We all do this to some extent of course, but I think IEE naturally takes it deeper psychologically, and can dwell there a long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
Yeah, I am fine with all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
In a story, though, I want to see a thread of interconnection to a main character. Not everything has to connect, lots of extra stuff develops other characters, but it also makes it more fascinating to see how they interact with the main.
I do this all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
Yes, I agree, Ne does that. Being able to do follow multiple characters and wanting tie-ins to the main are two different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
My husband is not a published fiction writer and nor am I so I cannot say if there were other flaws that made it difficult for me in his work. That was just one of the things I noticed. Many characters. Could be his fiction work needs polishing or editing. He has a very readable small published non-fiction work, though. :)
HP is another area I have not looked into deeply but I know it is an interest of yours. We are not on equal ground on this topic...I have nothing worthwhile to add to what you have said, or any useful comments on it.:shrug: Sounds good, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
Further regarding Statics vs Dynamics:
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...s_and_dynamics
Statics
* perceives events in an episodic manner, as seperate packets of episodes, scenes, pictures
* inclined to talk about properties and structures of reality
* transitions jump from one state to another
Dynamic
* perceives events as an unfragmented flow of continuous changes
* inclined to talk of movements and interactions of reality
Ne
- perceives inherent potential in objects
- objects don't tend to change their nature much over time, though circumstances can reveal hitherto unnoticed aspects of the potentiality
Fi
- perceives connections of a subjective, emotional nature that exist between objects. These feelings arise gradually and change little until a significant disruption occurs.
---
What does the above have to do with @Nessie?
Her posts are filled with talk about properties and structures, and her events are broken down into episodes.
You'll love it. It goes into great detail how negativist+result works. Which is exactly the kinds of stuff I describe that you 'just don't get' about my 'process'. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason
First, it's not an 'either or' thing. It's not 'one but not the other'. It's about the proportion between them. One more often than the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by consentingadult
Secondly, look over times you've described or talked about events. Were you easily able to break it up into smaller events or smaller scenes? Did you describe it in terms of its structure and/or properties? Were you easily able to analyse each scene without necessarily referencing the other scenes?
Or does it all just kind of run together making it difficult to break it up into different parts? Did you constantly use active verbs more than "is/am" verbs? Did you constantly refer to the timing of events and interactions? Did you project the event into the future? How it would evolve in the future? Did you describe a past event as if it was still ongoing, still evolving? Did you focus on the changes and interactions and how the interactions changed the flow of the event?
Then compare the proportions of each to see which style the descriptions mostly consisted of.
Note: for some people it is extremely obvious, they do a significantly larger amount of one over the other. For other people, it's not so obvious, perhaps they would be more obvious in other reinin/socionics/enneagram/etc areas instead.
ditto!Quote:
Originally Posted by consentingadult
I could see myself doing both equally.
From the link:
((Edited to add: basically, according to the theory, the more J you are, the more obvious it should be, the more P you are, the less obvious it would be))Quote:
People's expressions usually contain a mixture of both static and dynamic constructions. This proportion can be related to types roughly in the following way:
Static: Ji-Ixxj > Ji-Exxp > Pe-Ixxj > Pe-Exxp || Pi-Ixxp < Pi-Exxj < Je-Ixxp < Je-Exxj :Dynamic
That is, the statements of Ji-Ij and Pi-Ep types usually contain the greatest proportion of static constructions, while the expressions of Je-Ip and Je-Ej types contain the greatest proportion of dynamic constructions. From this information, one can then make inferences about the information metabolism preferences of a person and narrow down his or her likely type. For greater accuracy, analyzing the equivalent of at least one page of text is recommended. In case when all available material is online posts, it is best to analyze posts that contain blocks of text rather than one-liners.
Also, it's best to take writings where they aren't describing themselves...which by definition requires writing about one's structure and property. Even the analysis of Nessie's writings would've been more appropriate if we had a sample of her past writings of events.
I don't know. Flow wouldn't have a time stamp on it. And Dynamic would likely have a difficult time seeing where the beginning or ending of the event would be to even place a time on it. So impulse says it would be a static property, however, under what context are you remembering the time/date? Like, R, (SEI), remembers approximate times that something happened. I usually rely on him to remember such things, or estimate such things for me. But he also doesn't describe nor talk about events, either. Well, not beyond "it was when she said xyz".Quote:
Originally Posted by consentingadult
Do you have any writings where you are describing/recalling an event in your personal life?Quote:
Originally Posted by consentingadult
ESIs are all like, You shouldnt do that nag nag nag punch me in the face and EIIs are all like, you should be doing nag nag nag nag nag because nag nag nag nag nag.
Overall though the most prominent examples of ESi and EII differences I have are in parental styles. My older sister and my mom are both types, FI and NE sub respectively.
ESI more concerned on the day to day matters like establishing a schedule and being consistent with rules.
EII more concerned on being consistent with her behavior and what she thinks is better long term for growth.
The ESI kids(niece and nephew) I think are going to have more problems with authority figures when they grow up, and the EII kids (sisters) discipline.
Sorry for the tangent. If you want to tell them apart, tell them what do to. Or ifyou dont want to accidentily make enemies, insist on them telling someone else what to do. ESI will be receptive even if they dont agree, EII will not like the approach at all and dismiss it because their NE tells them that there are things that make telling someone what to do not a well informed decision.