Telling apart ESI-ISFj vs EII-INFj

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-03-2010, 07:01 PM
stevENTj

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.
10-03-2010, 07:12 PM
Azeroffs

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

A lot of EII type descriptions suggest that EIIs can very easily fall into bad or abusive relationships, and this is why.

FTR, ESI descriptions say the same.
10-03-2010, 07:18 PM
stevENTj

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azeroffs

FTR, ESI descriptions say the same.

MBTI ones or Socionics? Links?
10-03-2010, 07:21 PM
Wavebury

Quote:

Originally Posted by stanprollyright

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.

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.
10-03-2010, 07:56 PM
Azeroffs

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

MBTI ones or Socionics? Links?

Socionics... I can't find it.. What I might be remembering is this thread actually.

Basically that ESIs might subject themselves to less-than-ideal relationships because they are prone to self-sacrifice and devotion.
10-03-2010, 08:00 PM
Wavebury

But doesnt that thread say that ESIs are prone to having others take advantage of them? Thats also true for EIIs.
10-03-2010, 08:03 PM
stevENTj

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azeroffs

Socionics... I can't find it.. What I might be remembering is this thread actually.

Basically that ESIs might subject themselves to less-than-ideal relationships because they are prone to self-sacrifice and devotion.

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.
10-03-2010, 08:08 PM
Azeroffs

Quote:

Originally Posted by Typhon

But doesnt that thread say that ESIs are prone to having others take advantage of them? Thats also true for EIIs.

Yeah it does, and yeah I'd say it's true for both.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

I don't think ESIs will tolerate outright 'abusive' relationships like EIIs seem to be able to though.

yeah i think thats generally true
10-03-2010, 08:15 PM
Azeroffs

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azeroffs

Yeah it does, and yeah I'd say it's true for both.

yeah i think thats generally true

Lol, what does that say about LxEs?
10-03-2010, 08:33 PM
Wavebury

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azeroffs

Lol, what does that say about LxEs?

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.
10-03-2010, 09:54 PM
stevENTj

'Take advantage of' is pretty generic terminology because all types can be taken advantage of and manipulated, just in different ways.
10-03-2010, 09:57 PM
Jarno

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azeroffs

Basically that ESIs might subject themselves to less-than-ideal relationships because they are prone to self-sacrifice and devotion.

once they are in it yes. but ESI's are pretty picky.
10-03-2010, 10:14 PM
Azeroffs

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarno

once they are in it yes. but ESI's are pretty picky.

I mostly agree, but I think in some cases ESI feel like they need a relationship and will settle.
10-03-2010, 10:29 PM
Wavebury

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

'Take advantage of' is pretty generic terminology because all types can be taken advantage of and manipulated, just in different ways.

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.
10-03-2010, 10:45 PM
Blaze

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.
10-03-2010, 11:18 PM
mfckr

.
10-04-2010, 01:27 PM
FDG

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.
10-04-2010, 06:51 PM
Aiss

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.
10-05-2010, 05:35 AM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aiss

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.

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.

ESI stay in bad relationships because they feel that they can't do better.
10-05-2010, 06:48 AM
male

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritsa33

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.

You just said exactly what she said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritsa33

ESI stay in bad relationships because they feel that they can't do better.

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.

IOW nothing in this thread seems inaccurate.
10-06-2010, 05:04 AM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanks Arthur

You just said exactly what she said.

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.

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.
10-07-2010, 07:48 AM
Shazaam

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!!!
10-07-2010, 02:49 PM
Suz

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

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.

LOL, very true for my sister!

Thanks that was a helpful example! I'm not that great at identifying gammas yet...
10-12-2010, 06:20 AM
blankblank

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

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: )

Lol, that sounds like my LSE friend. :lol:

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevENTj

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.

XD Me: A leak? Oh yeah, that's why I've been avoiding walking under it the past couple of days.
04-25-2012, 04:02 AM
strangeling

*bump*

What do people mostly agree on as the difference?
04-25-2012, 04:07 AM
Beautiful sky

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.
08-06-2014, 11:34 PM
yeves

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?
11-13-2014, 11:55 PM
carrina

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.
11-13-2014, 11:59 PM
carrina

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritsa

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.

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..
11-14-2014, 12:42 AM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by carrina

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..

Then we're duals ;)
11-14-2014, 01:07 AM
ConcreteButterfly

: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.
11-14-2014, 03:05 AM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by yeves

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?

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.
11-17-2014, 12:40 AM
Computer Loser

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)
11-17-2014, 02:11 AM
blackburry

Quote:

Originally Posted by yeves

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?

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.
11-17-2014, 04:04 PM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

Maybe the difference between +Fi of Delta and -Fi of Gamma?

+Fi = positive, warm relationships. Psychological factors play a vital role for them. Without recognition of ethical values such as individuality and the uniqueness of others, religion and spirituality, non-interference in others lives, concrete humanism, etc., the stability they strongly desire is hardly possible.

-Fi = minimization of negative relationships. This element is critical of evil. They desire to get away from bad people and poor relationships, and to protect themselves from enemies and adversaries. They want to minimize negative experiences, because as we know from psychoanalysis, all extruded problems are liable to generate an emotional reaction one way or another, with a physical cost for the purification of the subconscious.

I know for me, personally, I'd rather smooth out conflict than walk away. For example, if someone is screaming or yelling at me on the phone, I can't stand when they hang up on me because I want to talk it out and come to a reconciliation. I've never hung up on anyone before.

Ive known people who have shut people out of their lives (friend, mothers...) and I'm quite unable to do that. If someone is showing a negative attitude towards me, I'd rather try to change it to positive than show a negative attitude back or walk away. I have ignored people before or withdrawn and waited till things have boiled down, though. Sometimes when people won't be reasonable, I find that the best approach.

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 lol
11-17-2014, 05:21 PM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

In that situation, I would have to wonder, why the mother-in-law is being abrasive? Is she bitter about something? Is it her upbringing? In my mind I would try to find the root of the cause, as to justify someone's behavior or to understand and relate to them more(empathy). I find it best to find ways to relate (positive) to someone than emphasize on the ways in which I can't relate (negative). So kind of similar.

Ha, yeah, I know what you are saying about clothes/makeup. I haven't worn makeup in weeks. Most of my clothes are for comfort. When I do dress up, I do try to look nice but I don't go for uncomfortable nice clothes. I'm in my 30's and I still pass for early 20's.

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!"
11-17-2014, 06:17 PM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

Hm. In that case I would wonder why they are racist. And maybe ask them why they are racist to get a better understanding of them. I would place myself in their shoes and think of ways which could have made them that way. Although I don't generally ask people questions as I feel like that would be intrusive and rude unless I'm close with that person. I'm usually pretty accepting of others and their differential opinions while still holding my own moral values. I have my own idea of what is right/wrong but I'm willing to understand why someone would have a different opinion. For example, I don't think it's right to be racist but I can understand if someone has been wronged or treated badly by a certain culture, why they would feel bitter about it while still not being racist myself. I can entertain several different viewpoints and perspectives at a time in my mind while still having my own views, which is why I often have a hard time arguing with people because I can see their side too. I can watch two people argue, not pick a side, and see where they are both coming from, by determining how I would feel in that situation, and use that to find a way to resolve issues between them.

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.

By trying to resolve issues between people you are mediating theregore you use your capabilities as a mediator as THE MEDIATOR (sei)..
11-17-2014, 06:37 PM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

Well I'm very sorry you feel that way. I'm trying to find ways in which we are similar and you keep focusing on the ways we are different. I'm very sorry you feel that we are so very different. I don't believe morals are exactly set in stone, and yes I generally try to stay out of other peoples business unless I'm dragged into it. I know when I do good I feel bad and when I do good I feel good. I know how I feel about things. I have no desire to argue with you . I think you are bound and determined to prove I am not EII because you feel you can't relate to me, while I'm trying to relate to you. I've read quite a few threads on here and don't really trust your judgement, no offense. I'm not the first person you've done this to and I don't think you are typed correctly either. I was just trying to be friendly....I think we should just agree to disagree on that.

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.
11-17-2014, 07:08 PM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

I don't have Fe. Fi is my strongest function. I do believe it is great to be honest with oneself. Honest introspection is a great thing, which is what I have been doing. I rarely mediate unless forced. I am very uncomfortable with conflict. I feel like you are trying to force me into thinking I am SEI and labeling me as such. I find you to be a very direct, arguementive, 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 think you might be IEI or ESI honestly. But I can't say you are because I don't know you and even if I did I would feel that it's up for you to decide yourself. You aren't being helpful, you are just making me extremely uncomfortable.

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.
11-17-2014, 09:33 PM
Eliza Thomason

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

I don't have Fe. Fi is my strongest function. I do believe it is great to be honest with oneself. Honest introspection is a great thing, which is what I have been doing. I rarely mediate unless forced. I am very uncomfortable with conflict. I feel like you are trying to force me into thinking I am SEI and labeling me as such. 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 think you might be IEI or ESI honestly. But I can't say you are because I don't know you and even if I did I would feel that it's up for you to decide yourself. You aren't being helpful, you are just making me extremely uncomfortable.

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.

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:

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 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.

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).

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page