Then what's with this?Originally Posted by Logos
No, we do not have those types. Sorry, but you must be mistaken.and whiners, apparently
"Just remember: Ti is the root of all problems and stupidity."
Then what's with this?No, we do not have those types. Sorry, but you must be mistaken.and whiners, apparently
"Just remember: Ti is the root of all problems and stupidity.
It's aThen what's with this?No, we do not have those types. Sorry, but you must be mistaken.and whiners, apparently
"Just remember: Ti is the root of all problems and stupidity.fact.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
whiner
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Wiener process? Yes, they are NiTe
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
You are using the dictionary and are still using the word incorrectly out of context? Wow, Joy, you are hopeless.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
you've been talking about Fe/Ti. i've been talking about Fi/Fe.we've been talking about Fe/Ti vs. Fi, as far as I could tell (I tend to think that what a lot of people see as "Fe values" are actually Ti values)
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
I'm with you, Diana. The feeling of where the relationship is and what it is surpass any considerations of social rules. This applies to people in general as well as particular friends, family, etc. I'm not saying that rules are broken easily or with enthusiasm, but if they contradict what I believe to be right then so be it. Mostly this revolves around treating people the way I'd want to be treated, the way I think that people as human beings should be treated. If I have contact with someone who treats myself or others poorly, then I probably won't talk to them unless I have to and then in a polite but extremely emotionally distant manner. I think the concept of psychological distance is very good in describing this.
Also, to the other posts about-leading people not keeping in touch, I admit that it describes me very well. On the one side, I think that others' opinion of me changes when they haven't seen me in a while, that if they liked me or needed me, they would try to get a hold of me. In this way, I think things aren't so different between us all. On the other, when I come to value someone for who they are this feeling has an amazing constancy that even years of having not seen one another doesn't diminish. At the same time, reconnecting can be very difficult. There's the fear that my friend might have changed, that they may feel differently about the way I've changed. In effect, there is a starting-again where I typically play it very cool while I try to ease into the new you. I try to manifest some Fe, but occasionally I forget, not needing it so much for myself but creating it for them so I can see them and how they react. So sometimes I may appear or come off as indifferent or not caring much, but only rarely is that the case.
I guess all I can say is that we don't need reassurance about a lot of these things and sometimes we lose sight that others do. It isn't that we don't think of you when you're not there. If anything, it's much the opposite, but often it gets buried (for me, anyway) beneath a feeling that we'd be presumptuous if we called you up or wrote you, that it might possibly not even be welcome or wanted. There's an immense caution behind any expression. Usually only when I am very certain does this get overridden, and this may be why the correspondence seems so spotty.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Pretty much the same on this end. To me, it's quite like a volley -- I may email someone, they might reply, I will reply again, and usually, that's where it ends on the other's part. Dropping the ball. (Mental note = disinterest)
Basically, it's just difficult for me to keep contacting someone: calling or emailing when they often don't return the contact. I really need the occasional "sign" that my contact is actually welcomed. This is particularly difficult trying to transition a friendship from a common "situation" (ie: group activity or work) where you're together by default. Sometimes, I think I've gotten over the barrier just to find that it's still there. I believe one of the qualities of
socio: INFp - IEI
ennea: 4w5 sp/sx
**********
Boy do I know this feeling. It's sometimes like playing tennis with yourself. Are my shots that bad or is the other person just distracted by the approaching rainstorm? I am not convinced it's a Fi tendency to keep other people at arm's length. I mean, could be. I just feel like it's happened to me with Fe types also (that's a bad sign, eh?). I fear I just expect more than most people do from my relationships.Pretty much the same on this end. To me, it's quite like a volley -- I may email someone, they might reply, I will reply again, and usually, that's where it ends on the other's part. Dropping the ball. (Mental note = disinterest)
Basically, it's just difficult for me to keep contacting someone: calling or emailing when they often don't return the contact. I really need the occasional "sign" that my contact is actually welcomed. This is particularly difficult trying to transition a friendship from a common "situation" (ie: group activity or work) where you're together by default. Sometimes, I think I've gotten over the barrier just to find that it's still there. I believe one of the qualities of
IEI-Fe 4w3
I probably do have some expectations, but I certainly don't have the same reaction from everyone I seek to become closer friends with. Sometimes it's simply very smooth with gradual, incremental advancements, whereas with other people it's like an etch-a-sketch relationship. We create a really wonderful picture, but somehow the frame gets shaken and I have to start over each time. It's disconcerting. But I always end up wanting to prove myself to those "difficult" ones that I'm worthy of their trust, interest, affection, etc.Boy do I know this feeling. It's sometimes like playing tennis with yourself. Are my shots that bad or is the other person just distracted by the approaching rainstorm? I am not convinced it's a Fi tendency to keep other people at arm's length. I mean, could be. I just feel like it's happened to me with Fe types also (that's a bad sign, eh?). I fear I just expect more than most people do from my relationships.Pretty much the same on this end. To me, it's quite like a volley -- I may email someone, they might reply, I will reply again, and usually, that's where it ends on the other's part. Dropping the ball. (Mental note = disinterest)
Basically, it's just difficult for me to keep contacting someone: calling or emailing when they often don't return the contact. I really need the occasional "sign" that my contact is actually welcomed. This is particularly difficult trying to transition a friendship from a common "situation" (ie: group activity or work) where you're together by default. Sometimes, I think I've gotten over the barrier just to find that it's still there. I believe one of the qualities of
socio: INFp - IEI
ennea: 4w5 sp/sx
**********
I'm with you, Diana. The feeling of where the relationship is and what it is surpass any considerations of social rules. This applies to people in general as well as particular friends, family, etc. I'm not saying that rules are broken easily or with enthusiasm, but if they contradict what I believe to be right then so be it. Mostly this revolves around treating people the way I'd want to be treated, the way I think that people as human beings should be treated. If I have contact with someone who treats myself or others poorly, then I probably won't talk to them unless I have to and then in a polite but extremely emotionally distant manner. I think the concept of psychological distance is very good in describing this.
Also, to the other posts about
I guess all I can say is that we don't need reassurance about a lot of these things and sometimes we lose sight that others do. It isn't that we don't think of you when you're not there. If anything, it's much the opposite, but often it gets buried (for me, anyway) beneath a feeling that we'd be presumptuous if we called you up or wrote you, that it might possibly not even be welcome or wanted. There's an immense caution behind any expression. Usually only when I am very certain does this get overridden, and this may be why the correspondence seems so spotty.
....... this is a true story:
Yesterday, I was speaking with an
Honestly, that made me want her really bad. It was like catnip to a cat, I don't understand why. Not even in a sexual way, although maybe. But just like.... even though I did something wrong, it was just so ..... drawing. "Dual Seeking", perhaps. It was great. Tremendous internal feeling of "wow, yeah, I want that".
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Amazing thread. +10 for everyone who posted in it with their comments about the nature ofIt was very enlightening.
However, I must say, reading the IEI responses in particular made much more sense than any of the other posts, even the other
Diana's posts were the most comprehensible regarding how
To me, I really need that
One other thing: I usually greet everyone very heartily and with a huge smile... I don't understand why some people have been saying here that being effusive seems "fake" to
I also agree so much with what the IEIs have said about this phenomenon of "jumping" quickly into a relationship with someone, friendship, business, anything! I will be extremely friendly right off the bat sometimes without knowing a thing about the other person ... other times, I will have said to myself yes, I want to befriend that person and I will do it and there I go about and do it. Luckily these people are usually of my own quadra or Alphans so they don't mind my intensity. I bond really easily and really quickly as well. I also do that thing where I speak my mind and tell almost anything about myself/my life/my feelings at an early stage of the relationship to break down what I see are "boundaries" .. very unnecessary ones. Why not just fast forward into knowing someone? I guess I am impatient ... sometimes I love the the thought of a SPARK with someone, a huge connection that develops immediately. I don't like taking the proper time to "get to know someone" .. all those seem like rituals to me ...
lol....... this is a true story:
Yesterday, I was speaking with an
Honestly, that made me want her really bad. It was like catnip to a cat, I don't understand why. Not even in a sexual way, although maybe. But just like.... even though I did something wrong, it was just so ..... drawing. "Dual Seeking", perhaps. It was great. Tremendous internal feeling of "wow, yeah, I want that".
Yeah... one time I got really bitchy with Peter, and when he tried to talk to me about it I was like, "I don't want to talk to you right now". Not long after that I left for an inspection, and when I was up on the roof I got this text message that said something along the lines of "I didn't deserve that." and some other stuff. I don't know what it is, but being "dealt with" appropriately like that when I probably deserve it gives me a feeling of security and makes me feel cared about. Drawing clear lines and insisting I talk about things when I'm upset is great as well.
Well to be honest, I did not exactly post anything that was directly productive towards the goal and purpose of this thread. So hopefully you were not looking at my responses for answers about the nature ofAmazing thread. +10 for everyone who posted in it with their comments about the nature of
However, I must say, reading the IEI responses in particular made much more sense than any of the other posts, even the other
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I apologizeWell to be honest, I did not exactly post anything that was directly productive towards the goal and purpose of this thread. So hopefully you were not looking at my responses for answers about the nature ofAmazing thread. +10 for everyone who posted in it with their comments about the nature of
However, I must say, reading the IEI responses in particular made much more sense than any of the other posts, even the other
There is no need to apologize. But I enjoyed reading what you wrote above; it was insightful and informative.I apologizeWell to be honest, I did not exactly post anything that was directly productive towards the goal and purpose of this thread. So hopefully you were not looking at my responses for answers about the nature ofAmazing thread. +10 for everyone who posted in it with their comments about the nature of
However, I must say, reading the IEI responses in particular made much more sense than any of the other posts, even the other
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
In the absence of emotions, words or mood? All of those things are transient, none of them are permanent. To me, they're the least reliable things to go on! You go on your history together, the little actions and behaviors (like refilling my glass without a word), and most importantly, your knowledge of the kind of people we are. The latter can be ascertained through conversation, which my Delta-self prefers to be serious/productive, but if you can tolerate my inconsistencies and silliness that says a lot too.a heavy Fi atmosphere makes me feel cornered and tense and evaluated. seems like positive Fi is demonstrated primarily by actions rather than emotions, words or mood. FWIW.
In the absence of any of this, what is there to go on?
I can see how that might seem like judgement, ascertaining the "kind of person" someone is. Well, if it is judgement, I say, so what? So yeah, I'm judgemental. Of rude people, selfish people (selfish bothers me, self-centered does not), loud/aggressive people, all kinds of people and animals and things, I judge. And by the way, it doesn't mean I think these are bad people. I use my judgement to determine who and what is of value to me (and by extention those I care about), not whether or not they have value at all.
I'm judgemental and I'm also very sweet. I rarely show anger or discontent. I guess this comes across as cold, but I always have a warm smile for everyone, though little else. Well, I also like hugging. But these are all actions. Words, emotions and mood? Eh.
At first I was confused about being called judgemental and cold. Me? I accept any and all kinds of people, and prefer the people most others would throw away. I see the sides others don't seem to see. I always give a smile and I like hugging. Other than smiling, I am not emotionally expressive in public, and not for long in private. But that's because, as Joy said, "emotional expression at any given moment doesn't mean much". My feelings run deeper than that, so deep they are very hard to disturb. So today you are yelling and crying, and tomorrow you are happy again. Through it all, you're the same person to me. It's very upsetting to me that transient emotions can be allowed to alter relationships for the negative.
I can understand that. First of all, she needs Si. Here he is making her physically uncomfortable (bad), for LAUGHS (EXTRA bad). And he did it more than once, knowing how she felt about it (BAD BUH BAD BAD BAD). It wouldn't be immature or a sign of "bad husbandhood" if he did it to a wife who liked practical jokes! Well, not in my opinion anyway. Although it might be hard for her to imagine such a wife, but she'd probably allow that such can exist. So yes, he was behaving like a bad husband in her eyes. But it wasn't a general rule that applied to all husbands (thou shalt not pour cold water on your wife). It was personal, not social. Thou shalt not pour cold water on your wife, when you know how that makes her feel. Otherwise, you must not care about how she feels. And a husband who does not care about how his wife feels can't be a good husband, right? I think the thought process goes something like that.My ISFp dad used to play practical jokes on my INFj mom. One of the worst (to her) was when he poured cold water on her in the shower. Just wanted to get a rise out of her but she was really upset and didn't think it was funny at all. She thought that no loving husband would do such a thing to his wife. He thought it was hilarious. But has since realized it was immature.
Yes, I get that, my ESFj brother is like that. Let me tell you something. Sometimes, I just want to feel however I am ALREADY ACTUALLY FEELING or how I CHOOSE TO FEEL, and I do not like the pressure to alter my mood to match yours. This is a very strong pressure I experience from Fe-types. My brother and I had a long conversation about this the other day. When he is down, everyone can see it, it is all over his face, and he wants nothing more than to talk about it.I will tell you now that I don't ever do this to fake an atmosphere, I usually do feel that way inside and would like others to feel as happy as I am.
But....what if I'm feeling happy? I had a great day! Great things happened that were just as important as whatever you are down about. But I must temper this now, so as to match moods with you, or I must take on the obligation of improving your mood.
I also experience this pressure from Ti-types. There is an ETp who is constantly poking and prodding and trying to get a rise out of me. Because I do not rise, does this mean I am cold? Or that I won't let myself be manipulated? To me, it is the latter, and I think less of him because he knows I am uncomfortable and keeps doing it anyway. But from what I have learned from this thread, he is also uncomfortable due to my lack of response. But I know that if I tell him to stop or tell him he's behaving inappropriately toward me, he will totally take that the wrong way, and call me "judgemental" or "uptight". So we are at a stalemate. So I will continue to pommel him with silence. But I will force a little smile from now on.
EII
4w5, sp/sx
This is why I sometimes wonder if i have fi but i think i refrain from making judgments about what kind of person he is from it. Which might be the difference.
@Diana: on social etiquette. where do you think these social rules come from? i believe they come from interpersonal relationships. i believe that it is one way that Fi leading types and/or valuing types try to help other people who don't value Fi learn how to behave better, from their perspective and a relational standpoint. social etiquette to me seems to be one small outflow driven by the inner flow of Fi. sorry i just see it that way. where the heck else would social etiquette come from then? Fe? Ti? naah. these information elements are not concerned with this.
does social etiquette define Fi? absolutely not! as an externally focused person, however, this is how i see it playing out. i can't see the relationship undercurrent you are referring to without any Fe. so i see Fi expressed as social etiquette and Fi interpersonal boundary and role setting.
Fi people don't usually get along with Fi polr people. so usually, from y'all (not you personally, of course) i am on the receiving end of this process of being put in my relational/role/boundary/social etiquette place. this sucks. this is the way i end up experiencing leading or creative Fi. i know you all don't feel like that's the place you come from, but this is the place from which you have to come; the extremes you have to go to in order to get an Fi polr type's attention.
so FWIW we don't get any positive benefit from your strengths, really. we can't see or understand your strengths. (and you probably don't get any from ours).
@courage: perfect example of interpersonal boundary setting. and your dual seeking reaction!
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Some extreme examples of social etiquette - -
- military salutes, standing at attention, etc
- curtseying to a monarch
- kissing the ring of a cardinal, bishop, pope (godfather), etc
These are things you do because you're supposed to, regardless of how you feel about your superior officer, your godfather, the monarch, etc etc. You may hate his/her guts, but you're supposed to do it, because it's not about how you feel about the person, as individual, at all.
That is what "social etiquette" is, and it does not come from Fi at all.
If you become more "realistic", it includes shaking someone's hand as you meet them, even as you think the person is an asshole.
Now there are overlaps with Fi, but that's not primarily Fi.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
see bold expat. you criticize my hypothesis yet you provide no socionics explanation for where etiquette comes from. social etiquette could be a side of Fi that Fi valuing folks don't want to look at. why would you? it seems so er surface and superficial, which is what Fe often is accused of being.Some extreme examples of social etiquette - -
- military salutes, standing at attention, etc
- curtseying to a monarch
- kissing the ring of a cardinal, bishop, pope (godfather), etc
These are things you do because you're supposed to, regardless of how you feel about your superior officer, your godfather, the monarch, etc etc. You may hate his/her guts, but you're supposed to do it, because it's not about how you feel about the person, as individual, at all.
That is what "social etiquette" is, and it does not come from Fi at all.
If you become more "realistic", it includes shaking someone's hand as you meet them, even as you think the person is an asshole.
Now there are overlaps with Fi, but that's not primarily Fi.
why is it important to do what one is supposed to do? what are the benefits of this?
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
If you're doing something out of consideration for another person due to your relationship with that person, it's Fi... and I wouldn't fucking call that "social etiquette". If someone opens a door for another person because they care about that person, that could be an "outflow" of Fi.
Now, if a man raises his son to open the door for his mother, then adds that he should open the door for all women, and the son complies and grows up opening the door for women that he doesn't know or care about, it because something like a "rule" of "social etiquette", that it is certainly not Fi (especially since it's been a cultural norm for men to hold the door for women).
lol... Whenever a guy opens the door for me, I usually say thank you or at least smile... and then I reach the next door before he does, and I casually hold the door open for him, allowing him to pass through first.
.
this thread sucks... I learned nothing
I just realize there is a good way of determining wether something is function related or not.
- suggest that this particular thing is related to a random function
- wait until a holder of this function responds declaring they dislike that thing so much that it can impossibly belong to their functions
- rinse repeat with all functions until none remain
- if everybody hates it, it's not function related.
Either that, or all this "meep, me no like!" reasoning is just primitive and useless.
No No No No No No NoIntroverted Feeling is a function that deals with etiquette in my opinion, because it relates to one's identity in relationship to cultural and conditioned values. In the context of etiquette, culture, society, country may be perceived as "objects".
I've actually sort of been thinking that this debate is missing representation from a couple of the quadras. It's been primarily between the Alphas and Gammas. Both groups hate being expected to follow social norms and rules of social etiquette and whatnot... I think this could be related to Aristocracy vs. Democracy.
Having a nonconformist world-view is unrelated to type. ANY world-view is unrelated to type, unless we have access to people's personal motivations for holding a world-view.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
.
By the way, Joy, the reason your sister-in-law has problems with Peter is because he's being an ungracious git. I know plenty of ESIs who have no problem showing people common respect, and absolutely expect the same of others; being an isolationist is NOT type related. Probably more related to the fact that both of you are Enneagram so variants last.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
.
THANK YOU.I disagree here, I do not think
So say that a mother says to her child, "Say please..."
So the child grumbles, "Please".
A request for etiquette is asked, the activity is performed, but why? Certainly this is how one method by which behavior is learned in childhood.
But is
Say the mother says in response to the grumbled, "Please." in this manner, "Say it like you mean it!"
The child says, "PRETTY PLEASE WITH SUGAR ON TOP MOMMY!"
What is the request? It is a request for intent, and in my opinion
I do not think so. What etiquette is is proper behavior "regardless" of how one feels about such and such individual, state or culture.
I bow my head, I salute my officer, I kiss the pope's hand. It is protecting one's
I believe this is one of the pieces of the subjective vs objective dichotomy.
Fi types can dish it out on Fe/Ti but they can't take it, huh? i so fucking think so
seriously though it's not a contest or anything. but some of you here seem really really defensive about this.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
socionics: information metabolism. how people in society communicate with one another.
how is social etiquette not socionically related?
and, no one is answering this from the Fi camp: if it is not Fi related, then to which IM element is it related??
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
.
Ti is about what works. Te is about what seems to be working
TeNi: It seems to work..lets move on
TiNe: But does it really work? In all possible situations? Now and in the future? No, we need to perfect it before moving on.
Social etiquette is about both kinds of ethics; if you misrepresent either your emotional states OR your relationship with a person, you're going to be seen as fake. Both kinds of ethics play a part, so quit this petty fucking squabbling about how all of you hate small talk and being polite and GROW UP ALREADY. It's NOT asking to fucking much to be polite; it's not a strain on your psyche, and it's not going to make you a fake person. GET the FUCK OVER IT.
BWfokgae]grjagszrjgW{GUhszu-FEe-9SGHUPHte YAFE
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
illogical.It's NOT related to an IM element it's just rules like any other rules. I already answered that.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Reply With Quote
